France,  England 

and 

European  Democracy 

1215-1915 

A  Historical  Survey  of  the  Principles  Underlying 
the  Entente  Cordiale 


By 
Charles  Gestre 

Docteur  es  Lettres 
Professeur  a  la  Faculte  des  Lettres  de  Bordeaux 


Translated  from  the  French  by 
Leslie  M.  Turner 

Assistant  Professor  of  French  in  the  University  of  California 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New   York   and   London 

Cbe     fmicfterbocfcer     press 

1918 


COPYRIGHT,  1918 

BY 
G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 


Ube  Knickerbocker  prew,  *Uw  £orh 


PREFACE  TO  THE  FRENCH  EDITION 

THE  alliance  of  England  and  France  against  Ger- 
many is  more  than  a  powerful  factor  in  today's 
struggle,  it  is  one  of  the  great  events  of  universal 
history.  For  the  first  time  two  countries,  both  makers 
of  civilization,  are  united  in  an  intimate  bond  which, 
apart  from  the  questions  of  common  defence  and  pooling 
of  material  resources,  is  fast  bringing  about  a  communion 
of  minds  and  hearts.  In  the  interest  of  peace  and  the 
progress  of  civilization  this  alliance  ought  to  last,  and 
last  it  will  if  the  English  and  French  learn  to  know  and 
understand  each  other. 

This  book  is  a  modest  contribution  to  the  understanding 
of  matters  concerning  England  in  the  past  and  in  the 
present,  these  matters  being  considered  only  in  their  bear- 
ing on  actual  events  and  only  in  as  far  as  they  forecast 
and  explain  these  events.  An  attempt  has  been  made  to 
show  through  just  what  sequence  of  causes — historical, 
psychological,  and  moral — Great  Britain  was  led  in  1914- 
1915  to  take  her  stand  on  the  side  of  right,  liberty,  and 
humanity.  These  causes  are  not  occasional  and  super- 
ficial; they  are  fundamental  and  essential.  Their  effect 
will  survive  the  crisis  which  has  suddenly  given  them  their 
full  significance  and  efficacy.  It  is  precisely  these  causes 
which  allow  us  to  augur  well  of  the  future. 

There  has  been  no  desire  here  to  write  a  book  bristling 
with  notes  and  references.  Only  known  facts  are  used 
in  the  text;  from  these  facts  an  effort  has  been  made 


2231' 


vi  Preface  to  the  French  Edition 

to  deduce  a  few  leading  ideas.  An  appeal  has  been 
made  to  those  readers  who,  believing  in  the  logical  se- 
quence of  human  actions,  attempt  to  connect  current 
events  with  their  distant  sources,  and  who,  starting  with 
the  given  facts  of  the  history  of  institutions  and  customs, 
make  an  effort  to  understand  such  events.  There  is  no 
purpose  here,  nor  pretension,  other  than  that  of  drawing 
the  reader's  attention  to  a  classification  of  facts  and  to  a 
clear  statement  of  ideas. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  AMERICAN  EDITION 

FRANCE  and  England  have  not  been  exempt  from 
wrong-doing  in  the  past;  but  they  have  learned 
the  lessons  of  experience  and  have  submitted  to 
the  guidance  of  their  better  selves.  Today  they  have 
forsworn  ambition  and  conquest ;  they  are  striving  to  up- 
hold certain  lasting  principles,  born  of  groping  endeavour, 
fostered  slowly  through  the  ages  and  matured  in  the  light 
of  their  genius.  English  liberty  and  French  equality  con- 
stitute the  bases  of  all  national  greatness  in  the  present 
and  of  all  international  progress  in  the  future.  Peace- 
ful countries  both  of  them,  England  and  France  are  now 
stemming  with  the  wall  of  their  dead  .  .  .  the  most 
savage  onrush  ever  recorded  in  order  to  insure  independ- 
ence and  security  to  the  nations  of  the  earth. 

France  and  England  were  predestined  to  be  the  defend- 
ers of  international  justice,  for  the  benefit  of  mankind. 
While  safe-guarding  their  own  existence,  together  with 
the  principles  they  represent  in  history,  they  have  given 
protection  to  small  nations,  maintained  the  inviolability 
of  treaties  and  furthered  the  dawning  entente  among 
peoples. 

In  the  settlement  of  this  much  desired  consummation, 
the  United  States  may  be  called  upon  to  play  a  part 
commensurate  with  the  magnitude  of  its  power  and  the 
nobleness  of  its  idealism.  When  it  is  no  longer  a  matter 
of  fighting,  the  United  States  may  abandon  its  reluctance 
to  participate  in  world-politics  and  may  decide  to  cast 


viii         Preface  to  the  American  Edition 

in  its  lot  with  the  Allies  for  the  sake  of  peace,  justice,  and 
humanity. 

The  review  of  French  and  English  history  which  I  here 
attempt  to  present,  as  setting  forth  the  deeper  causes  of 
the  indissoluble  union  of  spiritual  forces  on  either  side  of 
the  Channel,  exemplifies  values,  that,  in  my  thought,  are 
equally  illustrative  of  America's  true  traditions  and,  as  I 
hope,  prophetic  of  her  future  policy.  For  this  reason,  I 
dare  trust  this  study  may  not  come  altogether  amiss  at 
the  present  time.  If  this  book  succeeds  in  arresting  the 
attention  of  American  readers,  it  will  be  in  no  small 
degree  owing  to  the  exact,  sober,  and  pithy  translation  of 
Dr.  Leslie  Turner  of  the  University  of  Paris  and  of  the 
University  of  California. 


CH.  CESTRE. 


DEPOT  OF  THE  3QTH  REGT.  INFANTRY, 
DIEPPE,  1916. 


TRANSLATOR'S  NOTE 

THE  author  of  this  book,  M.  Charles  Cestre,  is  not 
unknown  in  the  United  States.  M.  Cestre,  docteur 
es  lettres  (d'etat)  of  the  University  of  Paris  and 
now  professor  of  English  at  the  University  of  Bordeaux, 
is  also  a  graduate  of  an  American  university — the  Univer- 
sity of  Harvard.  He  has  been  contributing  to  the  more 
serious  publications  of  France,  England,  and  the  United 
States  for  many  years.  He  is  a  scholarly  exponent 
of  Anglo-Saxon  thought  as  well  as  of  V esprit  frangais. 
Many  of  us  have  not  forgotten  his  interesting  study 
of  Bernard  Shaw.  Others  will  recall  with  pleasure  his 
masterly  work  on  La  Revolution  Fran$aise  et  'les  Poetes 
Anglais.  His  latest  book — UAngleterre  et  la  Guerre — a 
work  recently  crowned  by  the  French  Academy  of  Politi- 
cal and  Moral  Sciences,  is  a  comprehensive  and  able  sur- 
vey of  the  fundamental  elements  of  French  and  English 
culture,  with  their  relation  to  the  War,  from  the  thir- 
teenth century  down  to  the  present  day.  In  the  trans- 
lator's opinion,  limited  and  personal  as  it  must  needs  be, 
no  better  book  on  this  subject  has  been  written  in  either 
language.  The  translator  considers  it  an  honour  to  have 
secured  the  right  of  translation. 

It  may  be  well,  however,  for  the  benefit  of  those  who 
prefer  to  have  some  idea  of  a  book  before  reading  it,  to 
attempt  to  outline  the  contents,  scope,  and  leading  ideas 
of  M.  Cestre's  study.  A  glance  at  the  table  of  contents 

iz 


x  Translator's  Note 

shows  us  that  the  author's  chief  concern  is  with  the  more 
significant  and  only  definitely  admitted  facts  of  French 
and  English  history  and  with  their  relation  to  the  present 
War.  These  salient  events,  covering  seven  centuries  of 
history,  enable  the  author,  and  with  him  the  reader,  to 
discern  what  is  most  constant  in  the  evolution  of  the  two 
peoples.  This  historical  "constant,"  recognizable  under 
its  varying  forms  across  the  centuries,  ultimately  leads  us 
to  a  full  understanding  of  the  fundamental  idea — I'idee 
maitresse — of  the  book.  It  may  be  stated  as  follows. 
England  is  the  mother  of  liberty ;  France  is  the  mother  of 
equality;  the  English  idea  of  liberty  reaches  France  and 
is  partial  cause  of  the  French  Revolution ;  France  becomes 
the  evangelist — le  flambeau — of  liberty;  henceforth  the 
more  limited  and  traditional  English  liberty  and  the  more 
absolute  and  ideal  French  liberty  draw  slowly  together; 
reciprocally,  the  French  idea  of  equality  reaches  England ; 
England  progresses  towards  democracy  and  devotes 
much  of  her  energy  to  social  reform.  The  same  inter- 
change and  reconciliation  is  to  be  observed  elsewhere: 
England  is  individualist,  realist,  idealist,  and  rationalist 
in  greater  or  lesser  degree  than  France ;  in  the  nineteenth 
century  these  differences  tend  to  disappear.  Similarly, 
the  two  nations,  despite  certain  misunderstandings  come 
to  hold  about  the  same  opinion  concerning  the  balance  of 
power  and  the  principle  of  nationalities.  Again,  in  the 
matter  of  character,  a  similar  progress  towards  a  common 
ideal  is  to  be  noted.  Thus  the  two  nations  starting 
centuries  ago  from  the  opposite  extremities  A  and  C  of  an 


acute  angle  7>-  B  A  B  C  approach  each  other  slowly 

c^-^^' 

across  the  vicissitudes  of  intermittent  conflict  and  mis- 
understanding and  finally  meet  at  the  point  B — the 
Entente  Cordiale.  This  point  B,  then,  represents  the 


Translator's  Note  xi 

conciliation  of  the  two  points  of  view,  their  final  union  in 
a  single  ideal  and  the  starting  point  of  an  eventual  progress 
along  a  common  line  BX — the  "resultant" — figuring  the 
modified  "content"  of  the  two  branches.  But  this 
"content" — liberty,  equality,  individualism  capable  of 
solidarity,  idealistic  realism,  with  an  extension  of  the 
"Rights  of  Man"  to  the  "Rights  of  Nations"— is 
about  equivalent  to  the  "content"  of  democracy  and 
still  more  so  to  the  "content"  of  social  democracy. 
What  then  is  the  author's  fundamental  idea?  Simply 
this:  to  draw  our  attention  towards  the  salient  points 
in  the  history  of  Democracy,  that  is  the  slow  but 
sure  infiltration  of  democratic  principles  from  the 
upper  to  the  middle  and  finally  to  the  lower  strata 
of  society. 

This  compendium  of  Democracy  is,  moreover,  thrown  in 
relief  against  a  background  of  what  is  not  democratic. 
Here  the  author  enters  upon  the  War.  Democracy  is 
engaged  in  a  struggle  for  existence.  Starting  shortly 
after  Kant  and  Goethe  when  German  thought  was  in 
harmony  with  the  universal  conscience  of  mankind, 
growing  stronger  with  Fichte  and  Hegel,  divergent  forces 
have  been  operating  in  Germany,  until  finally  the  breach 
has  become  impassable.  Headed,  like  England  and 
France,  towards  the  democratic  point  "B"  Germany 
has  swerved  in  her  course  and  now  lies  outside  the  circle 
of  democratic  Europe;  and  therein  lies  the  pity  of  it  all. 
The  Germany  of  Kant  and  Goethe,  spiritual  member  of 
the  great  European  family,  has  been  led  astray;  she  has 
been  taught  that  she  is  the  ruling  member  of  that 
family,  because  naturally  superior,  and  that  the 
other  members  must  accept  her  creed  of  "state-ism" 
based  on  force,  of  organization  imposed  from  above, 
of  soulless  mechanism  and  of  Kultur  without  liberty, 
that,  in  short,  they  must  accept  what  would  be  the 


xii  Translator's  Note 

negation  of  their  histories  and  the  history  of  Democracy, 
or  perish. 

There  are  other  interesting  exposes  in  the  work  of  M. 
Cestre.  His  convincing  analysis  of  Democracy  is  sup- 
.  ported  by  studies  of  Carlyle,  of  John  Stuart  Mill,  of 
Matthew  Arnold,  and  others  which  are  as  profound  in 
philosophical  penetration  as  they  are  concise  and  limpid  in 
form.  M.  Cestre  is,  in  fact,  an  authority  on  the  progress 
of  English  thought  in  the  nineteenth  century.  Of  France 
herself,  of  the  meaning  of  France  the  author  is  perhaps 
over-reticent.  It  is  true  that  the  contribution  of  France 
to  Democracy  is  very  clearly  indicated ;  is,  indeed,  a  capi- 
tal feature  of  the  book.  But  French  equality,  French 
social  justice,  French  national  and  international  Demo- 
cracy (droits  des  peuples),  French  intelligence  and  moder- 
ation, French  idealism,  generosity,  and  humanity,  and 
above  all  France's  sincerity — her  demonstrated  willing- 
ness to  surrender  all,  even  her  life  if  need  be,  in  the 
defence  of  these  great  principles — this  part  of  the 
democratic  "content"  has  been  somewhat  sacrificed  to 
the  analysis  of  the  other  part.  And  perhaps,  after 
all,  such  was  the  author's  purpose;  for  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  he  is  writing  for  a  public  insufficiently 
acquainted  with  Great  Britain's  contribution  to  Demo- 
cracy and  civilization. 

It  is  possible  that  the  book  will  meet  with  severe  criti- 
cism. However  that  may  be,  it  is  the  translator's  sincere 
belief  that  M.  Cestre's  study  will  be  found  interesting 
and  valuable.  As  for  the  translation  much  more  severe 
criticism  is  expected.  Traduttore,  traditore.  Translating 
is  always  a  more  or  less  dangerous  matter.  For  the  re- 
vision of  certain  difficult  passages  and  other  valuable  sug- 
gestions my  warmest  thanks  are  due  to  my  colleagues  of 
the  University  of  California:  Mr.  A.  Boyd,  Professor  H. 
E.  Cory,  Professor  B.  P.  Kurtz,  Mr.  G.  R.  MacMinn,  Mr. 


Translator's  Note  xiii 

W.  W.  Lyman  (Celtic)  of  the  department  of  English; 
Mr.  G.  Boas  of  the  department  of  Public  Speaking  and 
Professor  R.  Schevill  of  the  department  of  Romanic 
Languages. 


LESLIE  MORTON  TURNER. 


BERKELEY,  CALIFORNIA, 
January,  1917. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER   I 

PAGE 

INTRODUCTION:  WHY  ENGLAND  Is  OUR  ALLY         .         .         i 

England  and  France,  two  nations  matured  by  long  experience 
and  grown  wiser  in  the  course  of  centuries,  are  fighting  not  only 
for  their  existence,  but  also  for  the  defence  of  the  Rights  of  man- 
kind, of  the  Rights  of  small  nations,  and  for  the  future  of  hu- 
manity. England  is  watchful  of  her  interests  both  political  and 
economic,  as  is  legitimate;  but  her  realism  is  controlled  by  a 
noble  idealism  which  has  grown  ever  broader  and  more  refined 
in  the  course  of  her  history  and  has  grown  constantly  nearer  to 
French  idealism.  Moral,  civil,  and  political  liberty ;  the  principle 
of  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe  and  the  respect  for  "histori- 
cal" nationalities.  Nobleness  and  dignity  of  the  individual: 
importance  of  character:  the  gentleman.  Common  sense  and 
ponderation  of  the  nation  in  its  conception  of  life  and  in  the  di- 
recting of  its  destinies.  England  was  destined  to  unite  with 
France  in  the  struggle  for  humanity  and  civilization. 


CHAPTER  II 

ENGLAND,  GUARDIAN  OF  THE  BALANCE  OF  POWER  IN 

EUROPE  (1588-1815)  ...         .         .         .21 

While  defending  her  independence,  the  liberty  of  the  seas,  and 
the  integrity  of  her  Empire,  England  has  been  led  to  maintain 
the  balance  of  power  among  the  stronger  nations — Whence 
her  struggle  against  Spain  under  Philip  II,  against  France 
under  Louis  XIV,  and  later  under  Napoleon,  and  today  against 
Germany  under  William  II.  Refutation  of  Bethmann-Hollweg's 
sophism  in  his  speech  of  August  4,  1914. 


xvi  Contents 


CHAPTER  III 

ENGLAND    AND    THE    MOVEMENT    OF    NATIONALITIES 

(1815-1870)        .......       42 

The  principle  of  nationalities  is  an  extension  of  the  Rights  of 
Man  to  the  Rights  of  Nations  and  a  guarantee  of  the  balance  of 
power.  England  and  France  free  Greece  from  the  Turkish  yoke 
(1827),  bring  Belgium  into  existence,  and  furnish  her  with  last- 
ing guarantees  (1830).  The  two  Powers  work  for  Italian  unity, 
England  by  diplomatic  means,  France  by  force  of  arms,  and  both 
by  demonstrations  of  popular  sympathy  towards  Italy.  Eng- 
land, powerless  to  secure  the  independence  of  the  Hungarians 
(1849)  at  least  saves  the  Magyar  patriots  from  martyrdom. 
Like  France  she  gives  her  sympathy,  unfortunately  ineffectual, 
to  the  Poles  (1862-63).  Dissensions  between  France  and  Eng- 
land, due  to  the  intermittent  awakening  in  both  countries  of  the 
warlike  spirit  which  is  kept  alive  by  recollections  of  the  Napole- 
onic epoch,  prevent  the  two  liberal  nations  from  co-operating  in 
the  establishment  of  a  state  of  peace  and  of  law  in  Europe. 
Germany  dominated  by  Prussia  makes  ready  to  draw  profit 
from  this  misunderstanding.  The  Franco-English  alliance  to 
maintain  the  balance  of  power  in  the  Mediterranean  (Crimean 
War)  is  only  of  short  duration.  Palmerston,  suspicious,  places 
England  on  a  footing  of  "armed  distrust. "  Gladstone  inaugu- 
rates the  policy  of  "splendid  isolation, "  and  allows  France  to  be 
crushed  in  1870.  Protests  in  favour  of  France:  John  Stuart 
Mill  and  Mr.  Frederic  Harrison. 

CHAPTER  IV 

FROM  "SPLENDID  ISOLATION"  TO  THE  "ENTENTE  COR- 

DIALE"  (1870-1904) 69 

In  1874,  England  unites  with  Russia  to  prevent  Germany  from 
strangling  us.  Government  of  the  Tories :  aggressive  imperial- 
ism (Disraeli,  Joseph  Chamberlain).  Coming  into  competition 
with  France  and  Russia,  England  enters  upon  a  severe  colonial 
contest  with  these  Powers  (Treaty  of  Berlin,  the  Tunis  affair, 
the  Egyptian  question;  Fashoda,  1898).  Germany  does  not 
seem  to  be  dangerous:  friendly  settlement  of  the  Anglo-German 
differences  (Treaty  of  1890);  England  encourages  German  de- 
signs in  Morocco.  But  a  change  is  about  to  take  place.  The 
Transvaal  War :  hostility  of  public  opinion  in  Germany.  At  the 
same  time  the  German  economic  danger  becomes  evident  in  the 


Contents  xvii 


industrial,  commercial,  and  maritime  domains.  The  building  of 
a  powerful  war  fleet  following  the  wishes  of  William  II  strength- 
ens the  ambitions  of  Germany's  Weltpolitik.  Change  in  Eng- 
lish policy:  The  Entente  Cordiale  (1904).  Friendly  settlement 
of  Anglo-French  difficulties;  agreement  about  Egypt  and  Mo- 
rocco. The  misunderstandings  once  removed,  the  natural  and 
profound  sympathy  of  the  English  and  French  peoples  manifests 
itself  with  enthusiasm.  The  Triple  Entente. 

CHAPTER  V 

WHAT  ENGLAND  HAS  DONE  TO  MAINTAIN  PEACE  (1904- 

1914)  .         .       96 

England  upholds  France — the  object  of  German  provocation  in 
Morocco:  meeting  of  Algeciras  (1906).  But  at  the  same  time, 
England  reduces  her  naval  programme  and  proposes  an  agree- , 
ment  with  Germany  to  put  an  end  to  armament  competition 
(1906-7).  Germany  refuses.  The  English  Liberal  ministry 
which  includes  some  socialists  is  strongly  in  favour  of  a  peace 
policy.  Sir  Edward  Grey  excels  in  maintaining  the  right  pro- 
portion of  firmness  and  conciliation.  New  negotiations  for  the 
simultaneous  limitation  of  naval  armaments  (1910);  ill-will 
and  duplicity  of  Germany.  Renewed  visits  and  diplomatic  con- 
ferences. (1912) :  Germany  without  giving  any  guarantee  con- 
cerning herself,  tries  to  detach  England  from  the  Triple  Entente, 
— July,  1914:  England  makes  repeated  efforts,  in  the  greatest 
spirit  of  conciliation  to  bring  about  the  settlement  of  the  Austro- 
Serbian  controversy  by  means  of  a  conference  of  the  Powers  not 
directly  engaged  in  the  conflict.  France  and  Russia  lend  them- 
selves to  all  the  arrangements  proposed  successively.  Germany 
remains  obstinately  hostile ;  her  evasions  and  ambiguity  poorly 
conceal  her  desire  to  bring  on  war.  Germany  and  Austria,  her 
accomplice,  are  responsible  for  the  war. 

CHAPTER  VI 

ENGLAND  THE  MOTHER  OF  LIBERTY  (1215-1815)  .         .     123 

The  whole  history  of  England  has  fitted  her  to  play  the  part  of 
guardian  of  liberty,  side  by  side  with  France.  Liberty  was  born 
on  English  soil ;  thence  it  came  to  France  and  inspired  the  French 
philosophers  of  the  i8th  century  and  the  men  of  the  Revolution, 
who  propagated  the  principle  throughout  the  world.  Kultur 


xviii  Contents 


PAGE 

is  the  negation  of  Liberty.  History  of  English  liberty:  Magna 
Carta,  the  Parliament,  the  Revolutions  of  1648  and  1688.  Ap- 
parent opposition,  in  1 789  between  English  liberty,  limited  and 
traditional  in  nature  as  expounded  by  Burke,  and  absolute  and 
ideal  liberty  of  the  French  type.  Both  types  were  to  draw  close 
together  in  the  nineteenth  century. 


CHAPTER  VII 

ENGLISH  INDIVIDUALISM  AND  GERMAN  STATE-ISM  .     149 

PART  I:  1815-1867. — Development  of  democracy  in  England 
under  the  influence  of  French  ideas.  Political  radicalism  and 
economic  utilitarianism;  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832;  the  doctrine 
of  laissez-faire.  The  Tories  and  the  doctrine  of  solidarity: 
Carlyle  lays  down  the  principle  of  "social  duty. "  Carlyle  has 
little  confidence  in  democracy,  but  remains  faithful  to  the  moral 
individualism  of  Kant  and  Goethe,  that  is,  to  German  thought 
at  the  time  when  it  was  in  harmony  with  the  universal  conscience 
of  humanity.  He  does  not  fall  into  the  error  of  Fichte,  who  dei- 
fies the  German  race,  nor  into  the  error  of  Hegel  who  deifies  the 
German  State. 

PART  II:  1867-1914. — Conciliation  of  liberty  and  solidarity. 
"Social  conservatives."  The  Electoral  Law  of  1867.  Pro- 
gress is  towards  social  democracy.  German  Socialdemokratie 
has  nothing  in  common  with  the  English  and  French  conception 
of  the  doctrine:  it  is  not  a  condition  of  liberty;  it  does  not  de- 
velop in  keeping  with  the  Parliamentary  regime;  it  submits  to 
autocracy;  it  is  reconciled  to  militarism;  it  accepts  and  perhaps 
wants  war.  John  Stuart  Mill,  an  apostle  of  individualism 
founded  on  democracy  and  solidarity.  The  Liberals  of  today: 
the  "social  organism."  Professor  Hobhouse.  The  reformer 
and  thinker,  H.  G.  Wells.  The  Radical-Labour  Party  Cabinet. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

IMPERIALISM  AND  EMPIRE  ......     196 

PART  I:  IMPERIALISM  OF  EXPANSION. — English  imperialism  is 
not  like  German  imperialism:  it  is  exclusively  colonial;  it  draws 
its  inspiration  from  the  principles  of  humanity.  The  revolt  of 
the  American  colonies  (1775)  leads  England  to  adopt  a  policy  of 


Contents  xix 


colonial  liberalism.  The  doctrine  of  force  according  to  Carlyle, 
differs  essentially  from  the  German  doctrine.  Carlyle 's  doc- 
trine respects  human  dignity,  recognizes  Right,  and  is  subordi- 
nate to  the  Christian  code  of  moral  duty.  English  imperialism 
imposes  duties  of  kindness,  justice,  and  self-sacrifice  on  the 
conqueror.  Rudyard  Kipling:  The  White  Man's  Burden.  The 
problem  of  Transvaal:  at  the  time  of  the  Anglo-Boer  War, 
French  opinion  was  not  correctly  informed.  England  may  have 
been  impatient  and  imprudent:  she  was  not  cynical  and  odious. 
She  gave  liberty  and  self-government  to  the  Boers  who  have  be- 
come reconciled.  England  of  today  has  turned  the  lesson  of 
the  Transvaal  to  account;  she  is  no  longer  a  conquering  nation; 
she  has  the  right  to  blame  and  detest  German  ambitions  and 
methods. 

PART  II:  UNION  IMPERIALISM. — The  regime  of  liberty  and 
equity  has  won  for  England  the  gratitude  and  affection  of  her 
colonies.  Protests  of  the  English  conscience,  in  the  i8th  cen- 
tury, against  methods  of  oppression  and  exploitation  employed 
in  colonial  government.  The  liberal  constitutions  of  Canada, 
Australia,  and  New  Zealand.  English  liberalism  does  justice 
to  Ireland.  The  legislative  and  financial  "unionism  "  of  Joseph 
Chamberlain  gives  place  to  a  spontaneous  and  free  union  based 
on  the  attachment  of  the  English  colonists  to  British  civil- 
ization. The  radical  Cabinet  inaugurates,  in  1911,  a  liberal 
policy  in  India  and  creates  a  nucleus  of  national  representa- 
tion among  the  natives.  German  methods  of  tyranny,  of 
persecution  and  repression  have  sown  hatred  everywhere;  the 
English  regime  has  been  so  sympathetic  that  all  the  colonies 
have  volunteered  prompt  and  affectionate  assistance  in  the 
present  war. 

CHAPTER  IX 

THE  MODERN  ENGLISH  SPIRIT  AS  EXEMPLIFIED  IN  THE 

CUSTOMS  OF  THE  COUNTRY 245 

Liberalism,  individualism,  and  the  moral  energy  of  the  English 
are  the  natural  outcome  of  their  character  and  habits.  English 
education  develops  the  responsibility  and  dignity  of  the  indi- 
vidual. The  discipline  resulting  from  athletics.  Honesty  in 
business,  probity  in  politics;  the  myth  of  a  "perfidious  Albion. " 
Independence  of  thought,  nobleness  of  character:  the  citizen; 
the  gentleman. 


xx  Contents 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  MODERN  ENGLISH  SPIRIT  AS  EXEMPLIFIED  IN  THE 

LITERATURE       .         .         .         .         .         .         .     267 

"  Ethical ' '  quality  of  English  literature.  Military  duty  accord- 
ing to  Wordsworth.  Duty  in  daily  Life  according  to  Carlyle. 
Duty  towards  mankind  according  to  Matthew  Arnold. 
Matthew  Arnold  admires  in  France  the  teaching  of  the  classical 
humanities  and  the  widely  diffused  culture  due  to  the  relative 
equalization  of  social  conditions.  Great  Englishmen  who 
have  extolled  France:  Meredith  (1870),  Kipling  (1913).  A 
contemporaneous  testimony  of  English  friendship:  the  article 
of  Mr.  Glutton  Brock  in  the  Times. 

CHAPTER  XI 

CONCLUSION:  WHAT  THE  ENGLISH  HAVE  DONE.    WHAT 

THEY  ARE  DOING.        .         .         .         .         .         .     299 

Relative  slowness  of  the  English :  its  explanation.  T.he  task  of 
the  English  fleet.  English  co-operation  in  the  war  on  land;  the 
"regulars"  in  Belgium,  on  the  Marne,  and  in  Flanders;  the 
"territorials";  the  volunteers.  Creation  of  an  army  of  three 
million  men;  the  willing  sacrifice  of  the  individual.  The  ques- 
tion of  conscription.  The  financial  effort  of  England:  taxes 
and  loans.  Generosity  of  individual  gifts.  The  "sacred 
union":  rallying  of  the  socialists  to  war  " to  the  bitter  end. " 
The  strikes  of  Glasgow  and  Wales  were  only  a  cloud.  The  in- 
dustrial mobilization.  The  English  have  shown,  under  the  spur 
of  necessity,  remarkable  qualities  of  "efficiency";  they  have 
employed  these  qualities  in  the  service  of  right  and  civilization. 

INDEX .        .        .        .351 


France,  England 

and 

European  Democracy 


France,  England, 
and  European  Democracy 


CHAPTER  I 
Introduction*  WKy  England  Is  oxir  Ally 

THE  War  of  1914,  or  the  War  of  Nations,  affords  us 
constant  proof  of  a  changed  order  of  things  in 
the  world.  The  reason  why  political  differences 
in  England  and  in  France  disappeared  in  the  hour  of 
supreme  decision,  to  give  place  to  the  union  of  all  parties — 
to  the  "Union  Sacree" — is  that  each  Parliament  understood 
that  the  defence  of  the  mother  country  involved  the 
stupendous  task  of  preparing  a  new  code  of  right  and 
wrong  in  Europe.  The  reason  why,  in  the  plains  of  Cham- 
pagne, in  the  trenches  of  the  Aisne,  and  on  the  hills  of 
Verdun,  the  French  army  has  fought  and  is  fighting  hour 
by  hour  with  unparalleled  valour  and  why  the  young 
men  of  England  have  hastened  to  join  the  colours,  and 
will  continue  to  do  so  without  legal  obligations,1  is  that 
French  and  English  soldiers  know  that  in  fighting  for 
their  country,  they  are  fighting  for  the  progress  of  to- 

1  The  final  resorting  of  England  to  conscription,  after  twenty-two 
months'  fighting,  will  be  treated  in  the  last  chapter. 

I 


2  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

morrow  and  for  a  saner  humanity  finally  cleansed  of  a 
plague  that  was  fast  consuming  it. 

History  has  known  but  one  war  of  the  nature  of  the 
present  one — the  War  of  1792,  which  was,  even  as  far  back 
as  that,  a  war  for  liberty.  The  noble  and  unselfish 
enthusiasm  of  the  French  Revolution,  however,  was  too 
intemperate  to  remain  master  of  itself;  it  broke  out  too 
soon  in  a  Europe  ill-prepared  to  accept  it.  Since  then, 
time,  which  has  made  France  wiser,  has  also  enlightened 
Europe — I  mean  those  nations  of  Europe  worthy  of  un- 
derstanding a  form  of  patriotism  which  does  not  exclude 
humanity.  And  so  it  comes  to  pass  that  these  humane 
and  pacific  people  must  rise,  regretfully  but  firmly,  against 
an  odious  attempt  to  monopolize  their  territories  and  to 
enslave  their  souls. 

Now,  if  this  war  is  to  leave  us  better  off  and  to  assure 
the  peace  of  Europe  for  some  time  to  come  (I  dare  not 
say  forever),  it  must  involve  no  conquest.  (I  am  not 
discussing  necessary  restitutions.)  Under  such  a  condi- 
tion this  great  struggle  will  subserve  its  true  end,  which 
is,  according  to  the  stern  law  of  human  concerns,  to 
establish  good  through  evil  and  to  hasten  through  fire 
and  blood  the  dawn  of  a  new  era.  The  allied  nations, 
old  in  the  matter  of  experience  but  young  in  their  ideal- 
ism and  generosity,  have  learned  a  good  deal  these  last 
twenty  years  at  the  sight  of  Germany  gone  mad,  a  helot- 
type  amongst  nations,  intoxicated  with  power  and  pride. 
They  have  submitted  to  a  severe  self-examination.  They 
have  grown  stronger  in  their  determination  to  avoid 
former  errors.  They  have  been  impressed  with  their 
mission,  which  is  to  transfer  certain  principles  appealing 
to  reason  from  the  field  of  ideas  into  the  field  of  facts, 
in  the  hope  that  justice  may  really  become  the  basis  of 
intercourse  between  states,  just  as  it  is  between  individ- 
uals; that  mutual  tolerance  and  good  understanding 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  3 

may  be  established  through  respect  for  liberty  fidelity, 
to  pledges  and  contracts,  honesty  in  word  and  deed, 
moderation  in  thought  and  limitation  of  desire. 

England  and  France  are  the  first-born  of  Europe. 
They  have  passed  the  age  of  ill-governed  passions.  Their 
vitality,  which  has  remained  whole  (and  whose  force 
surprises  those  who  thought  it  spent),  no  longer  finds 
vent  in  ambition  to  conquer,  but  applies  itself  reasonably 
and  nobly  to  the  solution  of  internal  and  external  pro- 
blems, taking  care  to  conciliate  their  own  interests  with 
the  destiny  of  mankind.  No  doubt  they  have  locked  in 
combat  in  the  past,  but  they  have  done  so  in  a  spirit  of 
chivalry  which  has  left  behind  only  a  recollection  of  fair 
dealing  and  an  admiration  for  courage;  they  have  passed 
through  periods  of  error  which  they  have  expiated  in 
suffering  or  redeemed  through  acts  of  reparation.  Let 
us  not  be  astonished  that  nations,  like  individuals,  learn 
moderation  only  through  the  stern  lessons  of  facts.  At 
least,  what  France  and  England  have  learned,  has  not 
been  in  vain.  Formed  as  they  were  in  the  hard  school 
of  long  history,  strong  today  in  prudence  and  decision, 
they  have  forgotten  their  quarrels  and  are  now  united 
for  the  purpose  of  curbing  the  appetite  of  a  covetous 
nation  overinflated  with  her  own  importance  and  misled 
by  the  favours  of  fortune. 

The  fact  that  Europe  was  stifling  under  a  burden  of 
armaments  must  be  laid  to  the  charge  of  Germany,  made 
one  as  she  was  through  conquest  and  organized  for  future 
conquest.  The  threat  levelled  against  all  nations  refusing 
to  enter  the  sphere  of  "Germanism"  was  extended  to  the 
peoples  of  the  Far  East.  The  promises  of  a  happier 
future,  the  seemingly  natural  fruits  of  progress,  were 
belied.  That  the  civilized  world  was  heartily  weary  of 
this  coercion  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  civilized 
world  rose  in  revolt  against  this  last  provocation,  against 


4  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

this  last  act  of  supreme  madness  committed  by  the  "Du- 
plice"  in  kindling  an  appalling  conflagration  for  a  mere 
quarrel  of  influence.  The  vigorous  action  of  Russia, 
the  heroic  steadfastness  of  Belgium  and  Servia,  the  inter- 
vention of  Japan,  the  rallying  of  Italy,  the  growing  mani- 
festation of  neutral  opinion,  all  of  this  shows,  as  does  the 
unshaken  determination  of  England  and  France,  that  what 
is  at  stake  is  a  universally  important  cause  whose  influ- 
ence reaches  beyond  the  interests  directly  concerned, 
and  whose  issue  will  have  an  immediate  bearing  on  the 
future  of  humanity. 

Now  in  this  immense  conflict  it  is  England  and  France 
who  are  in  the  highest  degree  the  champions  of  liberalism 
and  humanity.  It  is  fitting  then  to  inquire  just  what  in 
England's  past,  in  her  recent  history,  and  in  the  perma- 
nent sentiments  which  quicken  her  people,  may  explain 
her  present  attitude.  Why  is  England  our  ally?  What 
are  the  causes,  remote  or  immediate,  which  induced  her 
to  break  a  peace  maintained  at  the  expense  of  impor- 
tant concessions  and  with  all  the  patience  compatible 
with  the  responsibility  of  her  position  in  the  world?  To 
what  extent  did  her  convictions  and  interests  bring  about 
the  decision?  How  can  recent  events,  as  well  as  the 
political  and  moral  history  of  the  English  people,  explain 
the  abatement  of  party  quarrels,  the  postponement  of 
burning  questions,  and  the  co-operation  of  all  classes  and 
groups  in  the  common  work  of  national  defence?  Does 
not  the  magnificent  volunteer  movement  in  Great  Britain 
and  in  the  colonies  demonstrate  that  the  appeal  of  a 
strong  sentiment  and  a  worthy  ideal  was  heard  through- 
out British  lands,  in  just  the  same  way  as  the  call  which 
aroused  the  enthusiasm  and  indignation  of  all  Frenchmen  ? 
While  it  is  true,  that  for  a  time,  a  certain  placidity  was 
noticeable  with  some,  and  with  others  a  certain  repugnance 
to  the  idea  of  sacrificing  local  differences  or  interests  to 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  5 

the  common  safety,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  a  nation 
protected  for  centuries  against  aggression,  thanks  to  her 
natural  defences,  does  not  easily  forego  the  illusion  of 
her  security,  and  that,  furthermore,  English  imagination, 
judging  from  English  testimony,  is  very  slow  to  move. 
The  lukewarm,  however,  as  well  as  the  dissidents,  who 
were  never  numerous,  soon  rallied.  And  now  an  entire 
race  is  up  in  arms  for  the  defence  of  its  traditions  and 
hopes,  for  the  defence  of  its  honour  and  raison  d'etre  in 
the  world.  For  England  and  for  ourselves  it  is  not  a 
question  of  an  episode  in  military  history,  nor  even  of  a 
struggle  for  existence,  it  is  one  of  those  solemn  hours 
of  serious  and  impressive  import  in  which  a  crisis  in  the 
life  of  a  nation  coincides  with  a  crisis  in  the  history  of 
mankind.  In  inquiring  why  England  is  our  ally,  in 
analysing  the  moral  and  material  causes  which  have 
determined  her  intervention,  we  shall  be  better  situated 
to  understand  the  common  ideal  uniting  us;  we  shall  see 
the  designs  of  Germany  appear  in  a  more  sombre  and 
more  tragic  light — Germany  momentarily  stricken  with 
a  folly  of  pride  and  spoil  and  slaughter. 

Is  it  fitting  to  invoke  moral  causes  at  a  time  when  the 
din  of  arms  rings  harsh  and  merciless  ?  It  is  only  too  true 
that  force  is  the  passion  of  the  hour,  but  in  one  of  the 
two  camps,  at  least,  force  is  subservient  to  the  principle 
which  the  better  part  of  mankind  has,  from  time  im- 
memorial, placed  above  the  triumphs  of  violence.  Even 
in  the  days  that  are  upon  us,  when  the  struggle,  still 
indecisive,  allows  our  enemies  to  boast  of  a  semblance  of 
success,  a  certain  anxiety  is  astir  in  the  world,  in  non- 
warring  countries,  which  goes  to  show  that  Right  has 
conserved  its  supreme  authority.  .  .  .  Two  groups  of 
nations  are  locked  in  battle.  On  one  side,  let  us  grant 
the  argument,  there  exist  virtues,  if  the  word  be  taken 
in  its  Latin  sense  of  "virile  qualities";  but  these  virtues 


6  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

are  of  a  grim  sort,  inspired  by  selfishness,  rapacity,  and 
the  appetite  for  power;  primitive  virtues  if  you  will, 
exercised  only  within  the  limits  of  the  tribe,  but  trans- 
formed, outside  of  the  tribe,  into  cynical  duplicity  and 
sanguinary  violence.  On  the  other  side  we  must  un- 
doubtedly concede  errors  and  shortcomings,  but  these 
have  not  killed  generosity  nor  stifled  the  newborn  hope 
of  the  twentieth  century,  which  aims  to  conciliate  love 
of  country  with  goodwill  toward  men,  worship  of  a 
national  ideal  with  sympathy  for  other  civilizations, 
and  necessary  selfishness  with  abnegation,  the  condition 
sine  qua  non  of  justice.  No  doubt  the  definite  conversion 
of  the  Allies  to  the  cause  of  Right  is  of  recent  date;  the 
threat  held  over  them  by  the  common  enemy  has  been 
partly  responsible  for  this.  The  law  of  history  teaches, 
however,  that  at  each  stage  of  progress  Right  is  begotten 
of  stern  facts,  and  that  human  dignity  emerges  but  slowly 
indeed  from  animal  nature.  Paltry  interests  and  evil 
passions  yield  to  disinterested  and  righteous  sentiments 
only  under  the  shock  of  some  violent  and  appalling  com- 
motion. Nations  moderate  their  ambitions  and  forego 
conquest  only  after  having  endured  the  deceptions  and 
sufferings  of  disastrous  wars.  The  wisdom  of  the  Allies 
is  formed  in  part  of  such  prudential  moderation.  In 
the  case  of  England  and  France,  however,  there  is  some- 
thing more.  In  the  course  of  their  history  they  have 
both  nourished  sentiments  and  formed  notions  which 
have  become  the  bases  of  private  and  public  law  wher- 
ever justice  reigns  within  a  social  group.  After  centuries 
of  slow  evolution,  the  moment  is  approaching  when  it 
will  also  be  possible  to  have  these  principles  admitted, 
if  not  applied,  outside  these  groups,  in  the  intercourse  of 
nations.  Such  a  progress  in  the  status  of  Right  can  be 
accomplished  only  through  a  profound  transformation 
in  the  status  of  fact.  The  cataclysm  in  which  we  are 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  7 

participating    is    one    of    these    formidable    convulsions 
whence  mankind  emerges  regenerated. 

Let  us  state  at  the  outset  without  any  circumlocution 
that  England  is  defending  her  interests.  These  are 
legitimate  interests,  however,  due  to  the  daring  of  her 
sailors,  the  labour  of  her  colonists,  the  enterprise  of  her 
manufacturers,  and  the  successes  of  her  merchants  de- 
pendent upon  honesty  and  good  faith.  Her  patrimony 
consists  not  only  of  her  European  territory,  but  also  of  an 
immense  empire  composed  of  autonomous  colonies  and 
dependent  possessions,  hewn  out  of  the  rough  material 
of  continents;  of  commercial  patronage  secured  under 
every  latitude ;  and  finally  of  naval  supremacy,  protecting 
her  coasts,  colonies,  and  trade.  Established  in  the  most 
favoured  regions  of  our  planet,  consolidated  in  her  pos- 
sessions, thanks  to  a  tenacity  and  vigilance  which  have 
enabled  her  to  draw  profit  from  the  faults,  weariness,  or 
negligence  of  others,  protected  against  malevolent  in- 
tervention by  a  series  of  posts  guarding  the  ocean  cross- 
ways,  England  cannot  and  will  not  allow  herself  to  be 
threatened  within  her  sphere  of  influence  or  to  be  molested 
along  the  great  thoroughfares  of  navigation.  Questions 
of  an  imperial,  naval,  and  commercial  order  are  the  objects 
of  her  constant  preoccupation.  Can  she,  without  con- 
cern, permit  at  her  very  door  the  growth  of  an  immense 
high-sea  fleet,  yearly  more  formidable,  justified  neither 
by  the  necessity  of  defending  a  vast  stretch  of  seacoast, 
nor  by  the  need  of  protecting  numerous  dependencies, 
and  manifestly  destined  to  fall  upon  the  British  fleet 
some  fine  morning,  to  reduce  it  to  nought,  and  thus  to 
bring  about  the  ruin  of  England's  commerce  and  the 
conquest  of  her  colonies?  As  to  her  trade,  for  which, 
during  centuries,  she  has  patiently  established  markets 
in  the  five  parts  of  the  world,  is  not  that  also  a  vital  ne- 


8  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

cessity  for  her?  Within  her  own  narrow  territory  arable 
land  is  reduced  to  a  limited  surface,  farms  have  long  since 
given  place  to  factories,  and  farm  labourers  have  become 
working-men;  can  she  do  otherwise  than  take  umbrage 
at  new-comers  who  are  trying  not  to  supplement  British 
production  where  opportunities  are  afforded,  but  to 
overthrow  it  brutally  by  any  and  every  means  ?  A  nation 
is  not  only  powerful  because  of  its  possessions  at  home, 
but  just  as  much  so  because  of  its  priority  of  coloniza- 
tion on  certain  continents,  the  security  of  its  communica- 
tions and  frontiers,  and  its  supremacy  in  certain  markets. 
A  nation  has  not  merely  provinces  to  lose,  it  may  also 
lose  the  prestige  which  guarantees  commercial  success, 
the  demand  of  strong  markets  which  favour  business, 
and  the  certainty  of  peace  which  adds  value  to  prosperity. 
The  English  are  realists  enough  not  to  have  been  in- 
different to  the  dangers  to  which  the  German  ambition 
exposed  them.  "Realism"  does  not  necessarily  mean 
sordid  selfishness.  The  English  are  realists  because  they 
are  accustomed  to  take  facts  calmly  into  account,  even 
when  these  facts  play  havoc  with  their  feelings,  baffle 
their  conjectures,  and  belie  their  hopes.  There  is  a  form 
of  reality  with  them — either  psychological,  economical, 
or  historical — which  constitutes  the  necessary  substratum 
of  all  national  doctrines  and  aspirations.  Is  it  enough 
for  a  country  to  desire  liberty  in  order  to  possess  it? 
Must  it  not  forearm  against  causes  of  trouble  at  home 
and  against  measures  of  oppression  abroad?  Similarly, 
is  it  enough  to  be  firmly  attached  to  peace  in  order  to 
be  certain  of  enjoying  it?  Assuredly  not!  The  causes 
of  conflict  must  be  put  aside,  defence  against  aggression 
must  be  organized.  Economic  activity  admits  of  com- 
petition, but  pronounces  its  own  doom  if  it  ignores  or 
tolerates  manoeuvres  which  tend  to  stifle  it.  However 
admirable,  however  desirable,  the  regime  of  Right  may 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  9 

be  in  international  relations,  prudence  demands  that 
Right  be  founded  on  the  guarantees  of  force.  Is  it  suffi- 
cient to  be  loyal  to  one's  word,  respectful  of  treaties, 
resolved  to  satisfy  legitimate  claims,  and  be  firm  in  the 
purpose  of  avoiding  provocation?  By  no  means;  it  is 
also  necessary  to  forestall  the  encroachments  of  cupidity 
and  knavery,  and  to  keep  close  watch  over  operations 
of  craft  and  covetousness.  Legitimate  distrust,  indis- 
pensable force,  resources  both  ample  and  available,  such 
are  the  factors  of  English  national  life,  and  the  English 
with  their  sense  of  reality  have  taken  good  care  not  to 
neglect  them.  Naturally  they  have  made  use  of  these 
factors  with  a  view  to  their  interests. 

We  shall  have  to  ask  ourselves,  moreover,  what  was  the 
attitude  of  England  in  the  presence  of  the  economic  ambi- 
tions of  Germany  and  the  changes  introduced  in .  the 
direction  of  German  policy  by  William  II  after  the  dis- 
grace of  Bismarck.  Could  England  remain  indifferent 
to  the  industrial  and  commercial  struggle  undertaken 
against  her,  sometimes  by  means  of  sudden  additions 
to  the  protective  tariff,  or  by  state  premiums,  and  some- 
times by  means  of  clamorous  advertising  or  inferior 
counterfeiting  of  British  products?  Could  England  see, 
without  alarm,  the  situation  of  her  merchant  service,  so 
long  unrivalled  in  the  interocean  carrying  trade,  compro- 
mised by  the  artificial  development  of  the  German  fleet 
subsidized  by  the  government?  With  her  first  line  fleet 
serving  as  a  rampart  for  the  protection  of  her  European 
frontiers  and  colonial  possessions,  could  she  have  re- 
mained unconcerned  at  the  formidable  and  persistently 
accelerated  growth  of  the  German  naval  programme, 
soon  to  be  augmented  by  the  projected  construction  of 
an  aerial  squadron?  Could  she  do  otherwise  than  be 
alarmed  at  the  more  and  more  evident  purpose  of  Ger- 
many to  outdistance  her  or  to  supplant  her  on  the  points 


io  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

of  the  globe  where  she  had  established  herself  ...  in 
Africa,  in  Asia,  or  in  Oceania?  With  England  it  was  not 
a  question  of  preventing  Germany  from  having  "her 
place  in  the  sun,"  it  was  a  question  of  not  allowing  herself 
to  be  elbowed  out  of  positions  acquired  and  consolidated 
at  the  sword's  point,  built  up  by  toil  and  good  administra- 
tion, and  enriched  by  English  capital.  ...  So  much, 
then,  for  what  concerns  the  interests  of  England;  such 
are  the  imperative  motives  of  a  nation  essentially  realiste. 
I  shall  give  the  matter  the  attention  demanded  by  its 
importance. 

Now  England,  realist  as  she  is,  has  never  fallen  at  any 
stage  of  her  history  to  the  lower  levels  of  materialism. 
While  it  is  true  that  nations  without  nobility  and  moral 
vigour  become  degraded  when  in  touch  with  material 
interests,  it  is  also  true  that  magnanimous  nations  who 
wish  to  direct  their  destiny  toward  higher  planes  learn 
a  great  deal  from  the  contact  of  material  things  without 
ever  falling  under  their  dominion.  A  nation,  like  an 
individual,  is  worthy  of  esteem  only  when  capable  of 
lofty  aspirations.  Such  a  nation,  while  yielding  to  the 
lessons  of  experience,  borrows  therefrom  the  constitutive 
elements  of  right  and  liberty.  The  national  sentiments 
concerned,  if  of  a  noble  quality,  animate  the  spiritual 
being  with  the  desire  for  what  is  just,  and  little  by  little, 
at  the  price  no  doubt  of  gropings  and  errors,  achieve 
progress  in  the  sense  of  respect  for  one's  neighbour. 
The  national  thought,  if  of  a  generous  kind,  illuminates 
the  intelligence  with  the  light  of  what  is  true,  and  by 
slow  degrees,  with  the  reservations  due  to  incessant  cor- 
rection, takes  body  in  the  healthy  conception  of  an  ideal. 
Now  there  exists  a  sort  of  intemperate  idealism  which 
rushes  inconsiderately  towards  an  inaccessible  prospect: 
to  just  such  an  ideal  the  French  were  committed  for  a 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  n 

time;  a  century  of  misfortune  has  made  them  wiser  and 
has  taught  them  to  profit  by  the  teachings  of  reality. 
Then  again  there  exists  a  timid  idealism:  to  this  the 
English  have  long  lent  an  ear.  Diverting  their  attention 
through  instinctive  prudence  from  the  concepts  of  reason, 
they  have  applied  themselves  to  conceiving  the  good 
involved  in  facts  and  the  good  arising  out  of  facts  through 
slow  growth,  perceived  rather  by  the  moral  sense  than  by 
the  intellect.  And  thus  they  have  turned  their  steps 
slowly  towards  what  is  better,  tarrying,  at  times,  too  long 
at  the  intermediary  stages  with  momentary  haltings  too, 
and  backslidings,  but  without  ever  losing  the  faculty 
of  learning  anew  and  checking  themselves  on  the  verge 
of  error.  During  the  last  century  they  have  constantly 
progressed — sometimes  through  the  leadership  of  their 
writers,  at  others  through  the  impulse  of  the  national 
conscience,  and  at  times,  to  a  certain  extent,  we  may  say, 
under  the  influence  of  French  thought — towards  a  more 
intrepid  and  bounteous  form  of  idealism.  In  such  sort 
that  England,  advancing  in  the  direction  of  rationalism, 
without  losing  her  instinctive  respect  for  reality,  and 
France,  advancing  in  the  direction  of  realism,  without 
abandoning  her  innate  attachment  to  reason,  have  met 
midway  and  have  been  able  to  understand  each  other, 
to  purpose  following  the  same  ends,  and  to  commune 
over  the  same  ideal  at  a  time  when  necessity  obliges  them 
to  combine  their  available  forces  in  order  to  save  the 
common  achievement  of  civilization. 

What  is  this  achievement  of  civilization  in  so  far  as 
England's  own  share  is  concerned?  The  testimony  of 
our  philosophers  of  the  eighteenth  century,  of  our  political 
theorists  of  the  Revolution,  of  our  doctrinaires  of  1830, 
of  our  sociologists  of  today,  gives  answer :  this  achievement 
is  the  foundation  of  liberty.  We  shall  then  follow  the 
continuity  of  the  spirit  of  liberty  across  the  vicissitudes 


12  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

of  the  political  history  of  England  to  the  time  when 
Liberty  under  its  typically  English  form  found  expression 
in  the  work  of  Burke,  author  of  the  Speech  on  Conciliation 
with  America  and  Reflections  on  the  Revolution  in  France. 
Then  we  shall  follow  the  evolution  of  the  idea  of  Liberty 
under  the  influence  of  the  principles  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion revised  by  the  English  sense  of  things,  practical, 
traditional,  and  moral.  Is  Liberty  a  right  or  a  "good" 
which  a  man  acquires  only  under  the  condition  of  making 
himself  worthy  of  it  through  disciplined  conduct,  through 
respect  for  duty  towards  himself  and  others,  through 
prudence  in  the  application  of  new  ideas,  and  through  a 
just  submission  to  the  principle  of  competency  and  to 
the  principle  of  authority?  What  are  the  relations  of  the 
individual  to  the  State?  Does  the  ever-increasing  inter- 
vention of  the  State  in  private  affairs,  in  the  shape  of 
laws  of  protection,  of  regulation  and  redressing  of  in- 
equalities, operate  in  such  a  way  that  the  moral  inde- 
pendence of  the  individual  is  diminished  because  of  it? 
Is  there  a  tendency  to  reduce  our  consciences  to  a  com- 
mon level  by  the  very  means  which  are  used  to  better 
material  conditions,  or,  on  the  contrary,  does  social  pro- 
gress respect  the  traditional  substratum  of  liberty,  which 
means  the  respect  of  individual  differences?  We  shall 
pose  these  questions  just  as  the  English  have  done  in 
the  course  of  the  changes  of  recent  history.  In  noting 
how  the  English  have  answered  them,  in  the  sense  of 
more  personal  independence,  of  freer  criticism,  and  of 
variety  in  the  expression  of  opinions  and  aspirations,  we 
shall  show  what  an  abyss  there  really  is  between  English 
as  well  as  French  individualism  and  German  "Stateism." 
Now  civil  liberty  as  it  exists  within  democratic  nations 
(and  the  English  nation,  under  an  asgis  of  royalty  not 
intervening  in  political  affairs,  is  really  a  democracy) 
conciliates  desire  for  personal  independence  with  respect 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  13 

for  the  liberty  of  others.  It  follows  from  this  that  liberty- 
loving  and  democratic  countries  are  the  ones  which, 
through  extension  of  this  respect  from  individuals  to 
collective  bodies,  are  the  best  fitted  to  understand  the 
right  of  nationalities  to  existence  and  to  the  free  develop- 
ment of  their  destinies.  Just  as  their  conception  of  civil 
society  reposes  on  a  belief  in  the  eminent  dignity  of  the 
person  and  on  confidence  in  the  harmony  resulting  from 
diversity,  so  their  conception  of  the  society  of  nations 
reposes  on  respect  for  the  particular  genius  of  races  and 
on  sympathy  for  national  ideals.  England  and  France 
through  natural  generosity  and  deliberate  conviction  are 
the  defenders  of  nationalities  and  the  champions  of  a 
pacific  Europe  in  which  each  ethnical  and  historical  group 
should  be  able  to  develop,  according  to  its  traditions  and 
aspirations,  for  the  happiness  of  each  and  the  welfare  of 
all.  Here  again  the  two  great  liberal  nations  find  them- 
selves naturally  united  against  the  unheard-of  pretensions 
and  insupportable  tyranny  of  Germanism. 

The  first  condition  of  free  national  development,  within 
the  bounds  of  mutual  tolerance  and  acceptance  of  ne- 
cessary restriction,  is  an  approximate  equality,  in  impor- 
tance and  strength  between  the  great  Powers,  tending  to 
establish  within  the  material  order  counterweights,  which 
are  both  the  principles  and  the  symbols  of  the  spiritual 
balance  required  by  the  conscience  of  modern  nations. 
As  is  often  the  case  in  human  affairs,  the  policy  which 
reason  would  sanction  today  as  an  element  of  right  was 
first  prompted  by  interest  as  a  measure  of  prudence.  This 
is  the  very  policy  which  Richelieu  pursued  under  the 
name  of  balance  egale  between  the  great  nations;  it  is 
this  policy  which  England  has  constantly  put  into  effect 
since  existing  as  a  unified  nation,  conscious  of  her  r61e 
in  the  world,  in  virtue  of  her  time-honoured  principle  of 
the  "balance  of  power."  I  shall  show  how  concern  for 


14  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

this  principle  of  balance  of  power  has  guided  her  in  the 
darkest  hours  of  her  history  and  how  this  constant  pre- 
occupation which  has  determined  her  most  noteworthy 
interventions  in  continental  affairs  still  directs  her  today. 
This  very  line  of  conduct  with  which  M.  de  Bethmann- 
Hollweg,  in  a  speech  at  the  Reichstag,  charged  her  as  a 
provocation  and  as  the  most  overwhelming  proof  of  her 
responsibility  for  the  war,  is,  on  the  contrary,  a  title  of 
honour,  by  which  she  demonstrates  in  most  signal  fashion, 
that  she  understands  how  to  conciliate  national  interest 
with  her  concern  for  the  salvation  of  Europe  and  the  peace 
of  the  world. 

The  principle  of  balance  of  power,  however  important 
and  worthy  in  itself,  is  furthermore  closely  related  to  the 
physical  and  geographical  order  which  ought  to  preside 
in  the  establishment  of  the  map  of  Europe.  England  is 
progressing  towards  the  international  application  of  the 
doctrine  of  liberty;  she  understands  her  particular  work 
to  be  that  of  protecting  nationalities  considered  as  col- 
lective personalities,  who  have  won  the  right  to  exist, 
thanks  to  their  natural  qualities  and  noble  bearing  in 
history.  Nor  has  she  gained  this  generous  notion  in  a 
flash.  Just  as  with  other  nations  (ourselves,  for  instance, 
we  are  grieved  to  confess),  she  had  allowed  herself  to  be 
blinded  by  ambition,  influenced  by  resentment,  and  car- 
ried away  by  movements  of  impatience.  And  this  is  not 
to  be  wondered  at,  since  the  conscience  of  a  collective 
body  is  slow  to  awaken;  a  nation  must  submit  to  the 
long  lesson  of  experience  and  even  the  ordeal  of  misfor- 
tune, to  be  able  to  conceive  disinterestedness  and  justice. 
It  is  only  very  recently  in  our  twentieth  century,  still  so 
young,  that  the  potent  voice  of  right  has  reached  the  ears 
of  those  nations  worthy  of  interpreting  the  call.  It  is 
but  yesterday,  to  mention  only  one  instance,  that  France 
and  England  decided  to  treat  inferior  races  in  their  colonies 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  15 

with  due  respect  for  their  quality  of  human  beings,  to 
respect  the  traditions,  liberties,  and  forms  of  government 
of  conquered  peoples  and  to  prefer  a  protectorate  form  of 
rule  to  a  sheer  appropriation.  France  and  England,  at 
least,  enjoy  the  merit  of  having  shown  themselves  acces- 
sible to  the  progress  of  justice,  while  other  nations  have 
remained  obstinately  and  barbarously  closed  to  it.  In 
following  such  a  policy,  our  friends  and  ourselves  have 
earned  this  honour:  the  light  of  generosity  and  human- 
ity has  penetrated  our  mission  of  great  nations  destined 
to  protect  weak  and  infant  peoples.  My  office  will  be 
to  try  to  find  out  how  England  has  progressed  towards 
a  more  and  more  liberal  and  even  higher  conception  of  her 
duty  to  her  dependents  and  how  this  disinterestedness, 
applied  to  those  with  whom  she  is  more  closely  in  touch, 
has  led  her,  like  ourselves,  to  undertake  the  protection 
of  oppressed  or  menaced  European  nations.  There  is 
an  immediate  link  between  the  liberal  policy  which 
England  adopted  first  towards  the  Dominions,  then 
towards  Ireland,  lastly  towards  South  Africa  and  India, 
and  the  aid  which  she  is  bringing  to  Belgium  and  Servia 
today,  which  she  will  bring  to  Poland,  to  the  Balkanic 
peoples,  to  Syria  and  Armenia  tomorrow.  In  a  word, 
whether  at  home  or  abroad,  near  at  hand  or  far  from  her 
shores,  with  nations  who  are  wards  and  nations  who  are 
martyrs,  the  mission  that  England  is  fulfilling  is  the 
mission  of  liberty. 

For  the  English,  the  idea  of  liberty  is  closely  con- 
nected with  respect  for  that  inward  dignity  of  the  person 
which  they  call  "character."  National  self-government 
and  personal  self-government — these  two  things  seem 
to  them  to  rest  upon  the  same  basis,  that  is  to  say,  upon 
scrupulous  obedience  to  unwritten  law,  unfailing  attach- 
ment of  nations  to  honour  and  of  individuals  to  virtue. 
And  so  character  must  be  counted  among  the  forces  of 


i6  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

idealism  which  led  the  English  to  place  themselves  stoutly 
and  generously  on  the  side  of  right.  The  moral  sense 
is  a  national  quality  and  greatness  of  the  English  people. 
Ever  since  the  days  that  Englishmen  and  Frenchmen  as 
noble  adversaries  in  the  plains  of  France  were  in  the  habit 
of  observing  the  same  chivalrous  ideal,  the  English  have 
held  to  the  honourable  title  of  gentilhomme,  transformed 
into  gentleman.  With  us,  the  Renaissance  and  refined 
society  have  transformed  the  "valiant  knight"  into  the 
"polite"  man,  the  man  of  good  breeding  qui  ne  se  pique 
'de  rien  (who  does  not  boast) — he  -who,  avoiding  both  the 
narrowness  of  the  pedant  and  the  passion  of  the  fanatic, 
sets  a  pattern  of  generosity  and  refinement  acquired  in 
the  school  of  great  thinkers,  of  good  taste  which  is  the 
poise  of  the  mind,  and  of  rectitude  which  is  the  poise 
of  the  will.  With  the  English,  less  inclined  to  reflection 
than  to  action,  the  gentleman  is  the  man  of  good  family, 
who  does  not  fall  beneath  himself  and  who,  fortified  by 
his  conscience  and  by  the  opinion  of  all  that  counts  in  the 
nation,  bends  his  will  to  the  noble  things  of  human 
nature,  to  that  which  makes  mind  superior  to  matter, 
truthfulness  superior  to  success,  and  well-doing  supe- 
rior to  well-being.  How  intolerable  to  the  moral  dignity 
of  the  English,  or  what  only  concerns  us  here,  the  better 
class  of  English,  must  have  been  the  base  counterfeit  of 
ethics  which  has  taken  root  in  Germany  during  the  last 
half -century !  The  Germans  are  not  unacquainted  with 
truthfulness,  but  deutsche  Treue  is  operative  only  within 
the  pale  of  Deutschtum;  beyond  the  pale,  it  is  lawful, 
indeed,  it  is  a  glorious  thing  for  an  officer  to  act  as  a  spy; 
for  an  employee  to  intercept  commercial  secrets  or  for  a 
chancellor  to  tear  up  treaties.  Nor  are  the  Germans 
incapable  of  honesty,  but  here  again  it  is  a  German  brand 
of  probity  applicable  only  to  German  society,  to  the  Ger- 
man Fatherland,  and  to  German  public  wealth,  in  other 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  17 

terms  a  systematized  and  sublimated  form  of  selfishness, 
a  sort  of  heroic  glorification  of  the  German  Ego. 

English  moral  energy  is  of  quite  a  different  type.  I 
do  not  deny  (and  the  English  would  ill-judge  my  doing 
so)  that  their  system  of  ethics  cannot  coincide  with  their 
interests.  I  have  stated  so  already  and  cannot  repeat 
it  too  often :  the  English  are  realists,  who  know  the  tex- 
ture of  the  human  mind  too  well  to  entertain  the  belief 
that  disinterestedness  and  sacrifice  can  long  subsist  alone. 
But  they  possess  the  discretion  of  directing  their  interest 
in  a  sense  compatible  with  nobility  of  sentiment  and 
conduct;  their  ambition  is  not  aggressive;  their  system  of 
competition  is  not  disloyal ;  when  a  conflict  arises  between 
immediate  gain  and  honour,  they  are  wise  enough  to  prefer 
honour;  when,  through  momentary  blindness  they  have 
strayed  into  some  dubious  affair,  they  are  sufficiently 
wise  to  recognize  their  error  and  to  set  it  to  rights.  This 
is  not  the  place  to  insist  upon  the  shortcomings  of  the 
English  conscience.  The  traditional  misunderstanding 
between  England  and  France  led  us  in  former  times  to 
exaggerate  English  imperfections  and  to  consider  them 
apart.  What  nation  has  not  experienced  moments  of 
collective  aberration?  Where  is  the  people  proof  against 
the  inevitable  discovery  of  defects  which  are  the  ransom 
of  their  qualities?  Furthermore  the  English  are  not  lack- 
ing in  severe  critics,  occasionally  very  bitter  indeed,  who, 
sometimes,  striking  a  note  of  indignation  like  Carlyle,  or 
a  note  of  irony  like  Matthew  Arnold,  and  like  Bernard 
Shaw  wielding  at  times  the  redoubtable  arm  of  ridicule, 
assail  fallacies  with  violence  and  abate  the  velleity  of 
pride.  When  a  nation  criticizes  itself,  it  is  safe.  The 
Germans  would  not  be  in  the  position  they  are  in  today, 
if  they  had  not  lost  their  critical  sense.  But  as  far  back 
as  1830  they  exiled  Heinrich  Heine. 

My  r61e  will  be  in  particular  to  discover,  among  the 


1 8  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

recent  expressions  of  thought,  the  elements  of  the  English 
moral  ideal  which  are  in  harmony  with  our  own.  That 
this  people  has  not  always  succeeded  in  rising  to  the 
heights  of  its  ideal,  let  us  not  be  surprised;  what  really 
matters  is  the  fact  that  at  critical  moments  the  best  in 
the  nation  triumphs  over  the  less  noble  influences.  We 
have  proof  of  this  today.  English  customs,  English 
methods  of  education,  and  movements  of  opinion,  the 
bearing  of  the  nation  in  prosperity  or  misfortune,  will 
also  furnish  us  valuable  indications.  Even  the  very 
attitude  of  the  Dominions  and  the  conduct  of  dependent 
peoples  will  enlighten  us  as-  to  the  esteem  and  respect  in 
which  English  rectitude  is  held.  Having  clearly  made 
out  what  the  term  duty  signifies  to  this  people,  we  shall 
grasp  the  full  significance  of  the  magnificent  movement 
of  voluntary  enlistment  of  which  England  furnishes  us 
the  spectacle  today,  and  shall  measure  the  error  of  the 
Germans  at  the  beginning  of  the  war,  when  passing  judg- 
ment on  the  English  contingents,  they  spoke  disdainfully 
of  "that  despicable  little  army  of  mercenaries." 

The  last  element  of  moral  force  which  makes  England 
worthy  of  fighting  the  good  fight  in  the  struggle  for  civi- 
lization is  her  moderation.  Side  by  side  with  the  spirit 
of  liberty  and  the  sentiment  of  duty  there  is  to  be  noticed 
in  England  the  exercise  of  a  keen  sense  of  the  fitness  of 
things  which  has  marked  her  history  with  the  regular 
development  of  which  she  is  so  justly  proud,  and  which 
guarantees  her  people  a  solid  happiness  without  exalta- 
tion or  discouragement,  without  infatuation  or  deception, 
and  without  excessive  ambition  or  painful  renunciation. 
English  ponderation,  being  a  natural  quality  and  a  spon- 
taneous product  of  the  circumstances  which  favour  her 
national  development,  becomes  more  self-conscious  day 
by  day  and  thrives  more  and  more  through  a  better 
understanding  of  the  conditions  of  modern  life.  But 


Why  England  Is  our  Ally  19 

what  she  gains  in  philosophic  lucidity,  in  logic  and  co- 
ordination, in  scientific  precision,  deprives  her  in  no  sense 
of  her  spontaneity  and  instinctive  sureness.  Her  clear 
perception  of  life  corresponds  to  the  French  quality  of 
reasonableness,  not  as  dependent  on  abstract  reason, 
which  is  subject  to  intemperate  enthusiasms,  like  those 
of  1792  and  1848  (only  to  cite  happenings  of  long  ago), 
but  on  concrete  reason  of  a  prudent  and  matured  sort, 
attentive  to  the  facts  and  promptings  of  experience,  and 
true,  nevertheless,  to  our  classical  traditions,  to  our  talent 
for  analysis,  generalization,  and  clearness.  How  opposed 
English  moderation  and  French  reasonableness  are  to 
German  metaphysics,  argumentative,  hazy,  and  uncer- 
tain of  character,  which  sometimes  loses  itself  in  mystic 
transcendentalism  and  at  others  becomes  the  servant  of 
material  appetites  and  of  the  will  of  power,  whose  justi- 
fication is  found  in  the  horrible  theory  of  "cruelism"! 
German  metaphysics,  despite  scientific  claims,  has  been 
incapable  of  learning  the  great  philosophic  lesson  of 
science,  namely,  that  in  earthly  concerns  men  must  forego 
the  notion  of  the  Absolute.  The  German  mind  is  quite 
prepared  to  admit  that  history  has  evolved,  that  the 
aspect  of  civilization  has  constantly  changed,  that  nations 
and  policies  and  cultures  have  been  in  perpetual  growth 
— but  the  German  mind  admits  such  evolution  only  in 
so  far  as  Germany  herself,  or  more  precisely  Germany's 
evil  genius,  Prussia,  has  evolved  and  grown.  Today, 
the  climax  of  the  transformation  is  attained:  Prussia  is 
triumphant;  Prussia  has  reached  the  human  absolute, 
and  there  is  no  salvation  for  the  world  other  than  that  of 
being  absorbed  by  force  into  this  absolute,  that  is  to  say, 
into  this  perfection  of  organization,  of  method,  of  power, 
and  of  cynicism. 

Against  this  monstrous  conception  of  the  terrestrial 
Absolute,  which  is  only  an  idolatry  of  the  Germanic  Ego 


2o  Why  England  Is  our  Ally 

and  an  apotheosis  of  Bismarckian  "corporatism,"  Eng- 
land and  France  set  up  the  idea  of  the  relativity  of  things 
in  matters  of  government,  political  science,  and  national 
happiness.  Truth  comes  to  light  only  through  the 
spontaneous  development  of  national  tradition  and  cul- 
ture; progress  is  possible  only  through  the  diversity  of 
aims  and  tendencies;  peace  can  exist  only  through  the 
balance  of  contrary  forces;  for  each  nation,  happiness 
consists  in  the  free  pursuit  of  its  ideals. 

Although  England  and  France  have  constantly  reacted 
on  each  other,  I  propose  pointing  out,  chiefly,  the  r61e 
of  the  former  in  the  formation  of  the  ideal  of  national 
and  international  life  which  we  are  both  opposing  to  the 
German  idea.  Her  instinct,  narrower  in  certain  direc- 
tions, but  surer  in  others,  has  fortunately  guided  her. 
It  will  be  well  worth  while  studying  English  practical 
philosophy  to  note  how  her  moderation  has  led  her  to 
formulate,  in  the  matter  of  doctrines,  institutions,  and 
the  directing  of  public  spirit,  the  great  principle  of  liberty 
and  its  counterpart,  the  principle  of  compromise.  Abroad, 
she  has  succeeded  in  reconciling  patriotism  and  humanity, 
respect  for  law  and  recourse  to  force;  at  home,  she  has 
found  a  way  of  conciliating  democracy  and  authority, 
individual  and  state  rights,  independence  and  discipline. 
With  Russia  and  ourselves,  England  wishes  to  establish 
a  society  of  nations  within  which  an  equal  balance,  both 
in  the  material  and  spiritual  orders,  shall  be  maintained 
for  the  welfare  of  all  concerned,  for  the  safeguard  of  each, 
and  in  view  of  lasting  peace.  That  is  why  she  is  fighting 
today  on  the  territory  of  invaded  France  and  on  what 
remains  of  Belgium  soil;  that  is  why  she  will  combat  to- 
morrow in  the  North  Sea  and  in  the  battles  of  the  air, 
and  why  she  will  fight  on  to  the  bitter  end  for  a  cause 
which  we  both  consider  sacred. 


CHAPTER  II 

England,   Guardian  of  tKe  Balance  of  Power 
in  Europe 

ENGLAND,  like  France,  is  combating  for  her  exist- 
ence. She  is  combating  so  as  not  to  lose  her 
place  as  a  great  nation  nor  to  forfeit  the  moral 
heritage  bequeathed  by  the  past  generations  of  her  race. 
A  nation  grown  old  in  years,  possessed  of  national  unity 
for  centuries,  impelled  by  powerful  vital  forces,  and  en- 
dowed with  that  particular  faculty  of  noble  races  which 
furthers  the  parallel  development  of  moral  and  material 
existence,  England  has  fought  valiantly  (as  she  always 
has  in  the  great  crises  of  her  history)  to  defend  her  inde- 
pendence and  her  personality.  Since  the  days  of  William 
the  Conqueror,  she  has  suffered  no  invasion :  she  is  essen- 
tially an  unconquered  nation.  She  owes  this  privilege, 
no  doubt,  to  her  situation;  but  she  owes  it  also  to  her 
policy. 

I  should  like  to  show,  by  a  rapid  survey  of  her  history, 
that  it  was  England  who  instituted  the  principle  of  bal- 
ance of  power  and  caused  it  to  prevail  in  Europe.  No 
nation  has  shown  more  continuity  in  her  purposes.  While 
pursuing  her  own  particular  aims  for  her  defence,  for 
increase  of  power,  or  for  all  the  ideas  which  her  moral 
and  political  evolution  had  given  birth  to,  at  the  same 
time  she  has  served,  unconsciously  at  first  and  then 
deliberately,  the  cause  of  liberty  among  European 

21 


22        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

nations  and  upheld  the  right  of  each  to  exist  without 
submitting  to  the  supremacy  of  any  other. 

Today,  France  and  England  are  the  two  great  liberal 
and  pacific  nations  who  are  waging  war  because  they 
are  forced  to  do  so  in  order  to  safeguard  the  spiritual 
victories  painfully  won  over  violence  and  injustice.  Be- 
fore arriving  at  mutual  understanding  and  esteem,  and 
before  fighting  side  by  side  for  an  ideal  of  which  each  has 
created  a  part,  these  nations  have  attacked  each  other 
furiously  in  the  past.  Today  we  may  recall  these  con- 
flicts, which  were  noble  and  chivalrous  in  character, 
with  the  assurance  that  there  is  no  trace  of  them  other 
than  the  equal  admiration  of  the  two  adversaries  engaged. 
While  this  retrospective  view  may  show  us  that  England 
was  led,  in  certain  cases,  to  be  inimical  to  France,  owing 
to  political  prudence  or  anxiety  to  defend  her  situation 
in  Europe,  let  us  remember  that  it  is  not  so  much  our 
place  here  to  judge  as  to  understand.  .  .  .  These  wars 
took  place  at  a  time  when  Europe  was  in  a  permanent 
state  of  conflict.  The  contemporary  sentiment  with 
regard  to  war  was  not  what  ours  is  today. 

History  does  not  repeat  itself;  it  is  a  perpetual  renewal. 
While,  on  the  one  hand,  our  patriotism  is  linked  to  the 
past,  on  the  other,  our  idealism  hastens  towards  the 
future.  Piety  and  hope  may  be  reconciled;  a  broad  in- 
terpretation of  history  is  helpful  in  this  respect.  History, 
judged  in  the  light  of  the  progress  of  facts  and  ideas, 
becomes  a  collection  of  experiences  from  which  we  may 
draw  both  reason  for  pride  and  subject  for  meditation. 
We  are  far  enough  removed  from  Louis  XIV  and  from 
Napoleon  to  be  able  to  recognize  France's  debt  to  them 
and  to  declare  that  some  acts  of  theirs  must  never  be 
repeated. 

Since  the  sixteenth  century,  England  has  contributed 
powerfully  in  establishing  one  of  the  principles  from  which 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power        23 

the  Allies  derive  their  moral  force  at  this  hour.  On  two 
occasions,  she  has  upheld  this  principle  against  France, 
owing  to  circumstances  which  forced  her  to  do  so.  But 
it  so  happened  that,  in  protecting  herself,  she  favoured 
the  establishment  of  European  equity.  This  review  of 
the  past  will  not  be  without  effect  in  enabling  us  to  under- 
stand the  strength  of  determination,  the  promptness  of 
sacrifice,  and  the  sincerity  of  which  she  is  giving  proof 
today  in  her  effort  to  save  once  more  the  principles  of 
balance  of  power  and  national  liberty  in  Europe.  From 
the  persistence  of  her  resolution  in  the  past  we  shall  be 
able  to  estimate  the  solidity  and  worth  of  her  co-operation 
in  the  war  of  today. 

V  *  "i  '. 

What  Talleyrand  said  of  England's  foreign  policy  has 
often  been  repeated:  "England  is  guided  by  her  interests 
only."  That  depends  on  the  meaning  of  the  terms  em- 
ployed. If  the  expression  means  that  England  has  never 
concluded  an  alliance  nor  undertaken  a  war,  without 
deriving  profit  therefrom,  that  she  has  always  taken  ad- 
vantage of  the  faults  and  perplexities  of  her  rivals,  then 
the  expression  is  true  enough ;  England  is  a  staunch  parti- 
san of  this  method.  A  nation  can  depend  only  on  her- 
self, that  is  to  say  on  her  firmness  and  vigilance,  for  the 
extension  and  consolidation  of  her  power;  it  is  not  sym- 
pathy which  should  determine  an  alliance,  but  the  alli- 
ance which  should  determine  sympathy ;  in  no  case  should 
infatuation  or  enthusiasm  prevail  against  the  rules  of 
political  conduct  marked  out  by  history  and  by  circum- 
stances. France  would  have  succeeded,  on  more  than 
orie  occasion,  if  she  had  drawn  her  inspiration  from  this 
spirit.  England  adheres  to  realism;  her  statesmen  have 
exercised  practical  wisdom  and  have  been  upheld  by  the 
self-possession  of  the  nation.  But  if  it  is  said  that,  for 
England,  a  realistic  policy  signifies,  as  it  does  for  Germany, 


24        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

a  policy  of  base  interest  prosecuted  by  all  and  every  means, 
such  as  violation  of  treaties  and  war  by  treachery,  then 
the  assertion  is  supremely  unjust.  In  the  present  conflict, 
the  dignified  attitude  of  England,  who  declined  the  bar- 
gain by  which  Germany  sought  to  purchase  her  neutral- 
ity, and  who  furnished  assistance  to  Belgium  and  France 
without  reserve,  is  a  decisive  refutation  of  such  an 
interpretation. 

Now  the  British  are  not  idealists  in  the  same  way  that 
the  French  have  been  for  a  considerable  time;  they  do 
not  easily  conceive  enthusiasm  for  abstract  principles, 
superior  to  facts  and  interests,  such  as  those  which  led 
the  French  to  shed  their  blood  on  the  battlefields  of 
Europe  out  of  sheer  enthusiasm  and  for  glory.  But  the 
English  practise  a  noble  sort  of  moral  idealism,  which 
inspires  their  individual  conduct,  permeates  their  customs, 
furnishes  them  with  literary  themes,  and,  more  and  more, 
with  the  progress  of  the  public  conscience,  imposes  its 
principles  on  the  collective  acts  of  the  nation.  This 
moral  idealism  is  closely  related  to  the  facts  of  life,  of 
which  it  is,  so  to  speak,  the  expansion.  It  does  not 
transform  reality,  it  refines  it;  it  adds  a  character  of 
imposing  solemnity  to  the  lessons  of  history  and  experi- 
ence. One  feels  that  it  is  begotten,  little  by  little,  of 
the  triumph  of  rectitude  and  generosity  without  theories 
and  without  attempts  at  systematization. 

In  international  intercourse,  precepts  rather  than 
principles  imposed  themselves  upon  her  statesmen,  and 
then  upon  public  opinion  in  proportion  as  it  won  more 
authority  in  the  government  of  the  country.  England 
has  thus  adopted,  with  regard  to  the  great  questions 
dominating  the  destinies  of  Europe,  a  definite  attitude, 
quite  empirical  at  first,  but  progressively  more  self- 
conscious,  which,  without  neglecting  her  interests,  pro- 
claims her  adherence  to  liberal  ideas  and  her  growing 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power        25 

respect   for   moral    forces   in   the    intercourse    between 
nations. 

Since  her  disappointments  in  the  Hundred  Years' 
War,  England  has  abandoned  all  ambition  for  conquest 
in  Europe.  In  the  course  of  this  interminable  strife, 
she  became  conscious  of  her  personality  as  a  nation,  and 
came  into  sharp  collision  with  French  patriotism.  After 
the  War  of  the  Roses,  whose  outcome  was  the  overthrow 
of  feudalism  and  the  consummation  of  the  national 
unity,  and  after  the  Reform,  ready  to  mark  the  country 
with  its  particular  imprint  and  to  reveal  its  moral  ener- 
gies, English  nationality  was  definitely  constituted. 
Within  the  nation,  the  spirit  of  free  criticism,  favoured 
by  protestantism,  facilitated  the  development  of  the 
spirit  of  liberty  and  prepared  the  series  of  conflicts  which 
finally  resulted  in  constitutional  monarchy.  Abroad, 
the  necessity  of  establishing  herself  while  in  the  act  of 
resisting,  led  England  to  hinder  the  development  of 
certain  over-aggressive  States  and  to  defend  others  whose 
existence  was  in  danger.  Out  of  this  conflict  against  the 
powerful  and  intervention  in  favour  of  the  feeble  was 
formed  a  foreign  policy  inspired,  no  doubt,  by  just  con- 
cern for  national  interests,  but  often,  as  well,  and  more  and 
more  so,  by  instinctive  attachment  to  liberty,  to  religious 
tolerance,  and  to  the  independence  of  nationalities. 
Separated  from  Europe  by  her  geographical  situation, 
drawn  towards  distant  continents  by  her  destiny  as  a 
maritime  and  colonial  Power,  England  was  brought  to 
act  as  arbiter  of  European  conflicts,  being  especially 
preoccupied  with  the  necessity  of  not  allowing,  near  by, 
the  aggrandizement  of  too  powerful  a  nation  capable  of 
subjugating  the  others  and  threatening  herself.  She 
appointed  herself  guardian  of  the  balance  of  power  in 
Europe.  That  is  precisely  her  historical  significance; 
that  is  the  starting-point  of  the  eminent  part  she  has 


26        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

played  in  European  politics  and  in  the  formation  of  the 
European  turn  of  mind. 

Now  a  just  balance  of  power  is  the  indispensable  basis 
of  law.  From  the  approximative  equality  of  the  forces 
engaged  is  born  the  desire  for  peace  through  mutual 
abstention  from  violence  and  respect  for  treaties.  Human- 
ity may  thus  tend  towards  a  higher  form  of  justice  through 
the  parallel  advance  of  material  and  moral  forces.  .  .  . 
If  it  be  possible,  on  the  morrow  of  this  war  of  nations, 
to  entertain  the  hope  of  seeing  a  closer  harmony  among 
nations,  as  the  consequence  of  a  better  distribution  of 
the  forces  in  the  world,  then  England,  through  her  realism 
and  idealism  intimately  united,  will  have  largely  contri- 
buted thereto. 

It  was  at  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  under  the 
great  Elizabeth,  that  England,  unified  at  last,  swept 
along  on  the  tide  of  economic  prosperity,  and  filled  with 
buoyant  faith  and  ardent  patriotism,  played  for  the  first 
time,  the  great  part  of  guardian  of  the  liberties  of  Europe 
against  a  nation  overbearing  and  dangerous.  The  Spain 
of  Philip  II,  rich  with  the  spoils  of  the  New  World,  proud 
of  the  audacious  expeditions  of  her  Cortez  and  her  Pizarro, 
and  strong  with  the  rude  energy  of  her  people,  source  of 
a  hardy  race  of  soldiers  and  sailors,  the  Spain  of  Philip 
II  was  extending  her  sovereign  rule  over  an  empire 
"on  which  the  sun  never  set."  But  Philip  II  was  not 
satisfied  with  merely  reigning;  he  thought  it  incumbent 
on  him  to  exercise  despotic  control  over  his  people  and 
over  their  consciences.  At  a  time  when  the  spirit  of 
liberty  had  already  created  spiritual  needs  and  national 
aspirations,  he  declared  himself  the  champion  of  absolut- 
ism and  orthodoxy.  Throughout  his  possessions,  he 
established  a  regime  of  bloody  executions  to  overthrow 
attempts  at  political  independence  or  religious  emancipa- 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power        27 

tion;  abroad,  he  intervened  everywhere  with  a  view  to  the 
triumph  of  his  fierce  desire  for  "unification."  The 
Inquisition  set  up  a  reign  of  terror  in  Italy  and  Spain ; 
the  cruel  Duke  of  Alba  stained  Holland  with  blood; 
private  agents  upheld  the  Guises  and  the  League  in 
France ;  other  emissaries  prepared  the  formidable  Thirty 
Years'  War  in  Germany.  England  alone  escaped  the 
enterprises  and  intrigues  of  the  King  of  Spain. 

An  English  army  went  to  the  assistance  of  Holland. 
Among  the  leaders  was  one  of  the  noblest  representatives 
of  the  Renaissance  and  the  Reform  in  England,  Sir  Philip 
Sidney,  as  admirable  in  his  voluntary  submission  to  legiti- 
mate authority  as  he  was  in  spirit  and  in  moral  worth, 
— a  truly  noble  figure  of  new  times  who  perished  in  the 
struggle.  His  death  carries  with  it  a  symbolical  value; 
it  confers  the  value  of  an  ideal  on  a  conflict  in  which 
were  clearly  asserted,  already,  the  principles  essential  to 
the  progress  of  European  thought. 

It  was  on  the  high  sea  that  the  quarrel  of  the  two  great 
rival  nations  was  decided;  a  naval  battle  settled  the 
question  of  their  influence  on  the  continent,  of  their 
colonial  and  maritime  power,  and  also  of  the  predomi- 
nance of  one  of  the  two  conceptions  of  life  and  of  society. 
The  Spanish  ships  with  broad  flanks  and  lofty  poops — 
sea-giants  that  struck  the  nations  with  admiration  and 
awe — assembled,  at  the  mouth  of  the  Tagus,  in  the  form  of 
a  formidable  Armada,  which  set  sail  in  the  month  of 
August,  1588,  toward  the  shores  of  Great  Britain.  This 
fleet  of  more  than  a  hundred  ships-of-the-line  carried 
2500  cannons,  8000  sailors,  and  20,000  soldiers.  In  the 
English  Channel,  it  fell  in  with  the  English  fleet,  inferior 
in  number  but  composed  of  small  nimble  ships,  high- 
rigged,  and  commanded  by  the  famous  Captains  Hawkins, 
Frobisher,  and  Drake,  who  had  won  renown  from  their 
intrepid  expeditions  into  unknown  seas.  The  English 


28        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

ships,  taking  advantage  of  the  wind  and  the  current, 
separated  their  heavier  opponents,  fell  upon  them  one 
after  another,  firing  two  shots  to  the  enemy's  one,  pressing 
in  boldly  to  close  quarters  and  boarding,  and  succeeded 
finally  in  capturing,  sinking,  or  driving  off  the  terrible 
Armada.  A  tempest  completed  the  destruction.  Eng- 
land had  ruined  an  enemy  opposed  to  the  development  of 
her  colonial  empire,  averted  religious  oppression,  saved 
the  independence  of  the  Low  Countries,  and  delivered 
Europe  from  the  bondage  that  threatened  her. 

Already,  England  felt  surging  within  her  those  internal 
forces  which,  after  military  victory,  were  destined  to 
win  her  civic  victory,  and,  through  the  Revolution  of 
1648,  open  a  broad  way  to  the  institutions  of  liberty. 
At  the  same  time  the  Low'  Countries  entered  upon  the 
most  brilliant  period  of  their  prosperity,  defending  the 
independence  of  their  religion  and  founding  a  federal 
republic.  The  defeat  of  the  Armada,  while  striking  a 
fatal  blow  at  the  supremacy  of  Spain,  at  the  same  time 
marked  the  dawn  of  political  and  religious  liberty  and, 
already,  established  the  principle  of  nationalities.  Of 
course,  these  ideas  did  not  appear  clearly  to  those  re- 
sponsible for  discovering  them  thus  for  the  first  time; 
several  centuries  were  to  come  and  go,  many  a  revolution 
and  many  a  war  must  take  place  before  they  could  sink 
very  deeply  into  the  conscience  of  nations;  but  England 
brought  them  to  light  when  she  guaranteed  the  principle 
of  balance  of  power  in  Europe. 

«  .  •  .  .  »          . 

It  was  the  turn  of  France  in  the  seventeenth  century 
to  harbour  ambitions  of  universal  supremacy  and  to 
awaken  the  suspicions  of  England  by  her  bold  policy  and 
her  encroachments.  Against  the  France  of  Louis  XIV, 
the  English  nation  rose  tenacious  and  resolute,  despite 
the  weakness  of  the  House  of  Stuart.  Richelieu  had 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power        29 

accomplished  the  great  work  of  French  unity  and  had 
applied  himself  to  extending  the  territory  of  our  country 
as  far  as  its  natural  frontiers.  But  he  put  a  curb  to  the 
national  ambition  by  recognizing  the  principle  of  "equal 
balance"  among  nations.  Continuing  his  policy,  Louis 
XIV,  during  the  first  half  of  his  reign,  completed  the 
task  of  the  great  cardinal  and  filled  the  French  monarchy 
with  an  incomparable  lustre.  It  was  not  long,  however, 
before  he  allowed  himself  to  be  carried  away  by  a  sort 
of  exaltation  of  power.  His  wars  of  conquest,  in  the 
midst  of  peace,  stirred  up  abroad  an  obstinate  resistance 
of  which  England  was  the  moving  spirit. 

Charles  II  of  England,  in  pursuit  of  absolute  power, 
stood  in  need  of  Louis  XIV's  support  to  re-establish  the 
House  of  Stuart  on  the  basis  of  its  former  prerogatives. 
Accordingly,  he  used  his  skill  during  the  whole  reign, 
secretly  to  favour  the  policy  of  Jthe  "Grand  Monarch" 
in  return  for  enormous  subsidies.  His  people,  however, 
instinctively  loyal  to  the  traditional  policy  and  historical 
r61e  of  England,  exerted,  on  several  occasions,  such  a 
pressure  on  the  King  that  he  did  not  believe  it  prudent 
to  resist.  When  Louis  XIV  invaded  Flanders  in  1688, 
public  opinion  forced  Charles  to  enter  a  coalition  formed 
between  Holland,  England,  and  Sweden.  This  was  the 
Triple  Alliance  which  obliged  France  to  sign  the  Peace  of 
Aix-la-Chapelle. 

This  alliance  did  not  prevent  Charles,  soon  after,  from 
lending  Louis  the  assistance  of  the  English  fleet  and  of  an 
expeditionary  corps  for  the  purpose  of  invading  Holland, 
who  was  to  be  punished  for  her  opposition  to  political 
and  religious  absolutism.  Once  again  the  English  people 
intervened,  struggling  with  all  the  constitutional  means 
in  their  power  to  get  the  King  to  recall  the  English  forces. 
The  King  yielded,  and,  by  way  of  reparation,  felt  obliged 
to  offer' the  hand  of  Princess  Mary,  his  niece,  a  possible 


3O        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

heiress  to  the  crown  of  England,  to  Prince  William  of 
Orange,  Staatholder  and  hero  of  the  independence  of  the 
United  Provinces.  This  step  was  to  have  most  serious 
consequences,  since  it  resulted,  twelve  years  later,  in 
giving  the  crown  of  England  to  this  same  William  of 
Orange  and  in  putting  into  his  hands  the  united  forces 
of  Great  Britain  and  the  Low  Countries  against  France. 

The  admiration  and  legitimate  pride  which  we  French- 
men feel  for  the  creative  vitality  of  our  race  in  the  seven- 
teenth century,  for  the  talent  of  our  statesmen  and 
military  leaders,  for  the  splendour  of  our  arts  and  litera- 
ture— all  of  this  must  not  make  us  forget  that  if  the 
France  of  today  is  able  to  invoke  the  Right  of  Nations 
against  certain  odious  designs  aimed  at  her  and  at  Europe, 
it  is  largely  due  to  the  unflinching  resistance  that  England 
opposed  to  the  supremacy  of  Louis  XIV  in  favour  of 
the  balance  of  power  and  the  independence  of  nations 
in  Europe. 

Cold,  resolute,  cautious,  and  sober,  William,  like  his 
grandfather  William  the  Silent,  concealed  a  strong  will 
under  a  frail  exterior.  This  faculty  enabled  him  to  em- 
ploy diplomatic  skill  or  armed  force  according  to  circum- 
stances. He  took  the  lead  in  a  European  coalition  called 
the  Grand  Alliance  which  united  in  a  single  purpose  Swe- 
den, the  House  of  Austria,  the  principalities  of  Germany, 
Savoy  and  Spain,  with  Holland  and  England.  Despite 
the  extreme  valour  of  our  generals  and  our  troops,  despite 
the  untiring  resourcefulness  of  the  King  himself,  the 
splendour  of  the  reign  drew  rapidly  to  a  close. 

William  III  beat  the  French  in  Ireland  and  held  them 
in  check  at  Steinkirk  and  at  Neerwinden,  giving  ground 
only  after  having  exhausted  them.  Louis  XIV  won 
victories  of  such  sort  that  they  prepared  his  ruin.  At 
sea,  Admiral  Russell  crushed  the  French  fleet  and  burned 
the  best  ships  that  had  gone  aground  at  La  Hougue. 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power       31 

In  Holland,  William  retook  the  fortress  of  Namur  which 
Louis  XIV  himself  had  taken  by  storm  three  years  pre- 
viously. On  the  eve  of  his  death,  the  King  of  England 
confided  the  direction  of  the  war  to  Marlborough,  whose 
value  he  had  learned  to  appreciate  despite  the  smallness 
of  his  character.  It  was  this  general  who  dealt  the  con- 
quering monarchy  the  fatal  blow  from  which  it  never 
recovered,  at  the  battle  of  Hochstadt  (which  the  English 
call  Blenheim)  in  1704.  After  this  repulse,  Ramillies 
and  Malplaquet,  whatever  honour  is  due  to  French  valour, 
were  only  fields  of  useless  slaughter.  Denain,  it  is  true, 
saved  France  from  invasion.  But  Louis  XIV's  dream 
of  universal  supremacy  was  definitely  ended.  Popular 
gayety  in  ridiculing  Marlborough  in  song,  after  the 
French  fashion,  did  better  than  take  vengeance  for  our 
misfortunes;  it  marked  in  the  memory  of  posterity  the 
general  and  the  nation  who  had  fought  successfully  against 
an  aggressive  phase  of  the  development  of  France. 

These  recollections  are  painful;  they  are  not  without 
their  lesson.  The  France  of  today,  definitely  cured  of 
the  spirit  of  conquest,  is  in  a  position  both  to  honour  the 
Grand  Siecle  and  to  recognize  the  importance  of  England's 
part  in  the  formation  of  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe. 


Less  than  a  century  later,  the  powerful  vitality  of  our 
race  led  us  onward  once  more  to  the  conquest  of  the  world. 
The  eruption  of  energy  stirred  up  by  the  French  Revolu- 
tion and  the  militant  faith  developed  therein  by  the  doc- 
trine of  Reason  exalted  the  military  spirit  in  France. 
The  reply  to  the  insult  of  the  monarchs  of  Europe  was 
Valmy  and  Jemmapes.  Under  the  influence,  however, 
of  circumstances  perhaps  inevitable,  the  war  of  defence 
degenerated  into  a  war  of  conquest.  And  so,  France 
found  herself  face  to  face  with  an  irreducible  enemy, 


32       Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

ready  for  any  sacrifice,  deaf  to  all  proposals  of  settlement, 
unshaken  even  in  defeat;  that  enemy  was  England. 

At  first,  England  viewed  without  displeasure  the  efforts 
of  France  to  free  herself  from  absolutism  incompatible 
with  the  progress  of  the  new  ideas  and  aspirations  of  the 
nation.  England  prided  herself,  not  without  reason, 
upon  having  prepared,  through  the  work  of  thinkers  and 
through  precedent,  the  awakening  of  a  people  with  whom, 
despite  bitter  conflict,  she  maintained  close  intellectual 
intercourse  and  whose  brilliant  qualities  she  prized. 
Unfortunately  the  English  democrats  expressed  over- 
noisily  their  enthusiasm  for  the  universal  principles  of 
the  "Rights  of  Man"  in  justification  of  their  own  preten- 
sions and  their  agitation  for  reform.  This  attitude  of 
the  London  reformers,  together  with  the  initial  acts  of 
violence  of  the  Paris  populace,  gave  rise  to  the  first  doubts 
in  the  mind  of  the  established  middle-classes  who  were 
directing  affairs.  The  statesman,  Edmund  Burke,  raised 
a  cry  of  alarm  in  his  Reflections  and  denounced,  often  in 
violent  and  unjust  terms,  the  profound  disagreement 
separating  genuine  English  political  thought  from  the 
doctrines  of  the  Revolution. 

English  liberty  had  been  established  progressively 
through  the  slow  growth  of  ideas  and  institutions,  and 
two  conservative  revolutions  had  not  unduly  hastened 
the  course  of  things.  This  liberty  admitted  none  but 
prudent  changes  reconcilable  with  tradition  and  justified 
by  the  moral  progress  of  those  who  were  to  receive  its 
benefits;  it  was  made  for  the  use  of  the  middle-class  oli- 
garchy, haughty  but  conscious  of  its  responsibilities,  which, 
far  from  arrogating  abusive  privileges,  took  the  people's 
cause  in  hand  and  found  a  way  of  anticipating  legitimate 
reforms.  There  was  a  considerable  distance  between 
this  well-poised  and  temperate  liberty,  respectful  of  the 
monarchy  and  the  Established  Church,  attached  to  social 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power        33 

differences  founded  on  the  double  basis  of  heredity  and 
property,  and  the  subversive  doctrine  of  armed  revolt 
and  democratic  equality  and  fraternity.  It  is  true  that 
the  interpretation  of  English  liberty  given  by  Burke  did 
not  satisfy  all  his  compatriots.  While  he  insisted  on  the 
principles  of  stability  and  conservation,  other  minds 
bolder  than  his  insisted  on  the  principles  of  progress  and 
transformation  which  the  political  history  of  England 
authorized  no  less  evidently.  Not  only  democrats  of  the 
radical  reform  school,  but  representatives  of  the  Whig 
party,  like  Fox,  declared  themselves  convinced  admirers 
of  the  Revolution.  The  Government,  under  Pitt's  leader- 
ship, remained  impartial  in  presence  of  the  two  currents 
of  opinion,  recognizing  the  right  of  France  to  alter  the 
constitution  to  her  own  liking,  and  above  all  anxious 
to  preserve  peace,  out  of  respect  for  the  liberty  of  neigh- 
bouring States  and  in  the  interest  of  the  industrial  and 
commercial  activity  of  the  country.  England,  in  fact, 
thanks  to  the  early  adoption  of  machinery  in  her  manu- 
factories, to  the  development  of  her  merchant  marine, 
and  to  the  extension  of  her  colonial  empire,  had  become 
the  first  commercial  and  producing  nation  of  the  world, 
and  henceforth,  as  today,  placed  orderly  prosperity  and 
peace  among  her  most  serious  preoccupations.  Conse- 
quently, to  the  vehement  excitation  of  Burke  and  to  the 
violent  appeals  of  those  who  wanted  England  forced  into 
the  monarchical  coalition,  Pitt  replied  as  follows:  "This 
country  intends  persevering  in  the  neutrality  observed  up 
to  the  present  respecting  the  intestine  dissensions  of 
France  and  will  never  deviate  therefrom  unless  this  latter 
country  obliges  England  to  arm  in  her  own  defence." 

The  Revolution,  moreover,  true  to  the  great  r61e  of 
founder  of  a  new  order  of  things,  endeavoured  to  prepare 
a  way  for  fraternity  among  nations  in  much  the  same  way 
as  it  was  preparing  equality  among  citizens.  The  Con- 


34        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

stituent  Assembly  declared:  "The  French  nation  refuses 
to  undertake  any  war  in  view  of  conquests."  While  re- 
organizing the  army,  the  same  Assembly  was  careful  to 
create,  alongside  of  the  "regulars,"  the  "national  guard," 
destined  to  forestall  any  encroachment  of  the  military 
over  the  civil  power.  Despite  these  wise  measures,  five 
years  later,  the  necessity  of  protecting  the  country  against 
foreign  invasion  awoke  the  warlike  instinct  slumbering 
in  the  hearts  of  the  French.  A  still  more  serious  change 
took  place:  the  revolutionary  ideas  became  absolute  and 
tyrannical.  What  Burke  had  forecast,  actually  happened. 
The  Revolution,  instead  of  taking  counsel  of  experience 
and  gradually  progressing  towards  tolerance  and  order, 
through  a  just  apprehension  of  the  relative  in  political 
affairs,  held  more  and  more  closely,  under  the  sting  of 
war  and  danger,  to  the  universal  and  abstract  character 
of  its  doctrines.  The  extreme  party,  carried  away  by 
passion,  conceived  a  new  form  of  patriotism,  made  up 
of  military  faith  and  fervent  proselytism.  They  under- 
took to  liberate  the  world — a  generous  but  chimerical 
design,  which  was  bound  to  drag  the  Revolution  down 
towards  military  despotism. 

The  Convention  issued  the  decree  of  November  19, 
1792,  which  promised  "assistance  and  fraternity"  to  all 
peoples  in  revolt  against  absolute  government;  and  the 
decree  of  December  I5th,  which  proclaimed  "liberty  and 
sovereign  power  for  all  peoples  on  whose  soil  the  Revolu- 
tion had  carried  or  was  to  carry  her  arms."  This  meant, 
for  all  governments,  a  threat  that  wherever  the  tri-colour 
was  to  float  a  blaze  of  revolt  would  be  kindled.  In  Eng- 
land, a  small  group  of  democrats,  already  in  existence 
before  1789,  were  encouraged  to  new  hopes  by  the  events 
in  France.  Political  clubs  were  founded  on  the  model 
of  the  Paris  clubs,  with  whom  they  started  a  correspond- 
ence. Addresses  of  congratulations  were  sent  to  the 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power       35 

Convention,  who  returned  official  answers  and  admitted 
English  delegates  to  their  sittings.  As  soon  as  these 
facts  were  known,  loyal  and  conservative  England  almost 
unanimously  became  hostile  to  the  French  Revolution. 
Pitt  was  compelled  to  take  exceptional  measures  and  to 
begin  arming  against  France. 

The  danger  of  civil  strife,  in  England  (as  one  sees  today), 
was  more  imaginary  than  real.  The  radical-democrats 
were  a  mere  handful,  without  strength  or  credit.  Nor 
did  there  exist  between  the  French  and  the  English  notion 
of  liberty  the  impassable  gulf  which  Burke  imagined. 
Time  has  brought  together  the  two  doctrines,  which, 
through  mutual  quickening  and  tempering,  have  since 
furnished  the  world  with  the  essential  elements  of  political 
and  social  progress :  one  has  bred  the  prudence,  that  fosters 
continuity  and  discipline,  the  other,  the  daring  that  drives 
out  selfishness  and  routine.  Had  the  two  nations  under- 
stood each  other  earlier,  the  course  of  the  Revolution 
and  of  European  history  might  have  been  changed.  The 
Revolution,  freed  from  the  warlike  spirit,  would  not, 
perhaps,  have  sown  hatred  abroad.  .  .  .  Idle  conjectures ! 
The  Revolution  drifted  into  the  Empire  and  the  Empire 
rushed  headlong  forwards  to  the  conquest  of  Europe. 

From  that  day,  England  rose  against  the  Revolution 
and  the  Empire  as  she  had  risen  against  the  monarchy 
of  Philip  II  and  of  Louis  XIV,  and  for  the  same  reasons. 
Burke  reminded  his  countrymen  of  their  historical  r61e 
and  national  duty:  England  was  to  become  again,  as  she 
had  been  in  the  past,  the  rampart  of  Europe  and  the 
rampart  of  the  independence  of  nations.  "The  great 
resource  of  Europe  is  England:  not  at  all  an  England 
detached  from  the  rest  of  the  world  and  playing  at  the 
game  of  naval  power  (for  naval  power  would  be  a  mere 
game  if  all  its  resources  were  drained  and  all  power,  what- 
ever its  nature,  had  become  precarious),  but  an  England 


36       Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

who  considers  herself  an  incorporate  part  of  Europe,  an 
England  who  sympathizing  with  the  happiness  and  the 
distress  of  nations,  considers  that  nothing  of  human 
interest  is  alien  to  her."  What  Burke  says  here  is  an 
anticipated  protest  against  what  was  to  be  called  in  the 
nineteenth  century  the  policy  of  "splendid  isolation." 

One  of  the  main  causes  which  were  to  throw  England 
into  the  struggle,  was  the  question  of  the  independence 
of  the  Low  Countries.  Favourably  situated,  owing  to 
her  insular  position,  England  would  lose  the  advantage 
of  having  no  frontier  states  at  all,  if  she  allowed  a  great 
power  to  settle  opposite  her  and  to  organize  against  her  the 
naval  bases  of  the  North  Sea.  The  Belgian  coast  com- 
mands the  mouth  of  the  Thames  and  threatens  London. 
That  is  what  Napoleon  expressed  in  the  famous  formula: 
"Antwerp  is  a  pistol  aimed  at  the  heart  of  England." 
In  declaring  herself  guardian  of  the  independence  of  the 
Low  Countries,  England  was  to  be  led  to  conceive  the 
principle  of  the  buffer-state  and  of  the  neutrality  of  small 
states;  parallel  with  the  defence  of  her  interests,  she  was 
about  to  establish  the  guaranties  of  the  balance  of  power 
in  Europe,  one  of  the  essential  conditions  of  peace.  Not 
that  she  formed  at  that  time  the  notion  of  European  equity : 
the  great  conflict  of  ideas  and  forces  which,  continuing 
twenty-two  years,  from  1793  to  1815,  succeeded  in  fixing 
its  principles  only  very  obscurely.  The  terrible  war  of 
today,  even  if  it  causes  some  progress  in  the  notion  of 
international  justice,  as  we  hope  it  shall,  will  no  doubt 
be  yet  insufficient  to  establish  it  definitely.  Neverthe- 
less, in  the  measure  in  which  it  is  possible  to  extricate 
from  the  mass  of  facts,  after  the  smashing  blow  dealt  by 
each  dire  cataclysm,  some  small  portion  of  rational  truth, 
it  can  be  said  that,  from  1793  to  1815,  England,  by  the 
vigour  and  the  prudence  of  her  national  discernment, 
contributed  to  establish  the  material  conditions  whence 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power       37 

will  emerge  some  day  an  effective  doctrine  of  right.  If 
the  great  nations  ever  agree  to  limit  their  ambitions  in 
order  to  secure  the  blessings  of  concord  and  peace,  the 
respected  neutrality  of  small  states  will  be  the  first  article 
of  the  international  code  of  the  future.  In  repeatedly 
guaranteeing  the  independence  of  Belgium  against  plans 
of  conquests  entertained  by  great  military  powers,  Eng- 
land has  established  a  state  of  fact  which  announces  a 
state  of  law. 

When,  after  Jemmapes,  the  Convention  annexed  Bel- 
gium, war  with  England  had  become  inevitable.  England 
was  the  moving  spirit  of  the  coalitions  which,  falling  apart 
and  reorganizing  according  to  fluctuations  to  which  she 
was  a  stranger,  could  always  return  to  her  as  to  an  immu- 
table centre.  The  Convention  and  the  Directory  found 
her  everywhere  barring  their  passage.  Napoleon  ex- 
hausted his  genius  and  the  offensive  force  of  one  of  the 
finest  armies  of  the  time  in  trying  to  loosen  the  bonds 
forged  by  her  hand.  The  most  brilliant  successes  of  the 
conqueror  of  Europe  did  no  more  than  strengthen  his 
enemy  in  the  determination  to  resist.  Whereas  the  King 
of  Prussia  is  seen  to  abandon  the  strife  in  1795  and  ne- 
gotiate in  1805;  and  while  the  Czar  Paul  I  suffers  himself 
to  be  drawn  into  a  plan  for  partitioning  Europe,  in  1800, 
and  his  successor  into  a  scheme  for  cutting  up  the  Turkish 
Empire,  in  1807,  England  negotiates  at  Amiens  in  1802 
only  to  recruit  her  strength  for  a  time,  and  then,  soon 
after,  to  resume  the  struggle  without  mercy.  .  .  .  For 
the  monarchs  of  Europe,  the  war  against  Napoleon 
was  only  an  expedient  of  dynastic  character  or  the  execu- 
tion of  a  political  plan:  for  England,  it  was  a  national 
conflict  in  which,  along  with  her  existence,  she  was 
defending  her  traditions  and  the  future  of  Europe. 

From  1795  to'  1798,  the  radical  group  of  the  Whig 
party,  through  their  mouthpieces  Fox  and  Sheridan,  set 


38        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

up  a  cry  against  the  war.  But  the  invasion  of  Switzer- 
land by  the  armies  of  the  Directory,  the  appropriation 
of  the  treasure  of  Berne,  the  violation,  by  decree  of  an- 
nexation, March  22,  1798,  of  that  very  "Helvetic  liberty" 
which,  in-  the  eyes  of  idealists,  was  the  symbol  of  the 
republican  idea,  reduced  to  nought  the  last  resistance  of 
the  opposition.  The  war,  become  the  great  war,  rallied 
the  patriotism  of  the  whole  nation,  furnished  motives  of 
inspiration  to  poets  lately  strong  admirers  of  France  the 
emancipator,  and  was  maintained  with  unanimous  cour- 
age, despite  the  death  of  Pitt,  despite  the  advent  of  the 
Whigs  to  power,  despite  financial  difficulties,  the  misery 
of  the  lower  classes,  and  the  suffering  caused  by  the  con- 
tinental blockade.  In  the  rare  moments  of  hesitation  on 
the  part  of  the  Government,  or  of  slackness  in  the  man- 
agement of  military  affairs,  indignant  voices  were  raised 
to  proclaim  the  necessity  of  persevering  to  the  end:  in 
1796,  Burke  denounced  an  attempt  at  negotiations  in  his 
pamphlet  on  "Regicide  Peace";  the  poet  Wordsworth 
stigmatized  the  weakness  of  Wellesley  who,  in  1808, 
by  the  convention  of  Cintra,  in  Portugal,  allowed  Junot 
to  escape  with  ten  thousand  French  troops. 

It  was  England  who  struck  the  heaviest  blows  at  the 
military  fortune  of  Napoleon.  It  is  enough  to  recall  the 
defence  of  Saint- Jean-d'Acre  by  Sir  Sidney  Smith,  and 
Nelson's  victory  at  Aboukir,  which  put  an  end  to  the 
expedition  in  Egypt;  Trafalgar  which  broke,  alas!  the 
maritime  power  of  France;  Vimeria,  Vittoria,  and  Sala- 
manca in  the  Iberian  Peninsula,  which  shook  the  prestige 
of  the  imperial  arms  and  hastened  the  final  catastrophe. 
Finally  the  conqueror  of  Napoleon's  marshals  in  Spain 
beat  the  Emperor  himself  at  Waterloo.  Just  as  Russell 
and  Marlborough  had  made  the  Grand  Alliance  efficient 
against  Louis  XIV,  so  Nelson  and  Wellington  were  the 
executors  of  the  European  coalition  against  France.  For 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power        39 

the  third  time  England  had  saved  Europe  from  the  domi- 
nation of  a  military  power  whose  force  had  increased  to 
the  point  of  becoming  a  permanent  danger  to  all;  for  the 
third  time  she  had  defended  the  right  of  nations  to  exist 
and  to  fulfil  their  national  destiny;  for  the  third  time  she 
had  brought  about  the  triumph  of  the  principle  of  balance 
of  power  in  Europe. 

This  rapid  review  of  the  history  of  the  last  three  cen- 
turies has  not  been  unprofitable  if  it  has  rendered  intel- 
ligible England's  part  in  today's  events.  England  is 
associated  with  Russia,  Italy,  and  France  to  defend, 
against  a  new  adversary,  a  hundred  years  after  the  de- 
nouement of  the  Napoleonic  epopee,  the  conceptions  and 
principles  of  which  she  has  constituted  herself  the  historical 
guardian. 

The  German  Imperial  Chancellor,  when  pronouncing 
a  speech  at  the  opening  of  the  second  session  of  the  Reichs- 
tag, December  3,  1914,  found  it  prudent  to  abandon  the 
attitude  of  violent  boasting  which  he  had  assumed  on 
August  4th  and  to  cease  clamouring  in  the  face  of  the 
world:  "Might  above  Right."  He  sought  to  captivate 
the  sympathies  of  the  neutral  States  in  trying  to  prove 
the  innocence  of  Germany,  reduced  to  defending  herself 
against  the  unjustifiable  aggression  of  Europe.  He 
threw  the  responsibilities  of  the  war  partly  upon  Russia 
and  France  but  especially  upon  England.  "The  Cabinet 
of  London  could  have  rendered  the  war  impossible.  ..." 
England,  who  held  in  her  hands  the  possibilities  of  peace, 
wanted  war,  because  her  traditional  policy  is  to  declare 
herself  the  enemy  of  any  power  prosperous  enough  and 
strong  enough  to  cause  her  suspicion. 

"  The  Triple  Entente  is  the  work  of  England,  destined  to 
serve  the  well-known  principle  of  the  balance  of  power, 


40        Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power 

which  signifies,  in  plain  German,  that  the  principle  observed 
for  centuries  in  the  English  policy  of  opposing  the  strongest 
continental  power  ought  to  find  its  most  solid  support  in 
the  Triple  Entente.  .  .  .  The  general  run  of  thought  in 
England  has  developed  in  the  course  of  years  into  this  po- 
litical principle,  as  solid  as  an  indisputable  dogma,  that  the 
role  of  arbiter  mundi  belongs  to  Great  Britain,  that  she  could 
assume  and  fulfil  this  role  only  by  means  of  an  incontestable 
naval  supremacy  and  by  the  balance  of  continental  forces. 
England  was  ready,  it  is  true,  to  come  to  terms  with  us  on 
certain  points;  but  the  first  and  supreme  principle  of  her 
policy  subsisted,  namely,  that  Germany  must  be  held  in 
check  in  the  free  development  of  her  energies  by  the  balance 
of  power.  ..." 

Herr  von  Bethmann-Hollweg  concluded:  England 
ought  to  have  gone  to  war  with  Germany  and  wanted  to 
do  so.  This  sophism  might  be  called  skilful,  had  the 
Chancellor  been  able  to  prove  two  things:  ist,  that  "the 
political  principle,  solid  as  an  indisputable  dogma,"  of 
the  balance  of  power  is  a  doctrine  of  aggression;  2d,  that 
the  principle  "of  the  free  development  of  the  energies  of 
Germany"  is  a  pacific  doctrine  unmixed  with  disturbing 
factors.  In  the  absence  of  this  proof  there  remain 
history  and  facts.  Now,  although  history  does  record, 
on  England's  part,  a  certain  number  of  aggressions,  this 
is  certainly  not  the  case  in  the  circumstances  in  which 
she  was  led  to  undertake  the  defence  of  threatened  nation- 
alities and  to  save  Europe,  while  saving  herself,  from  the 
violent  and  tyrannical  domination  of  a  power  momen- 
tarily misled  by  immoderate  ambition,  whether  that  power 
were  Spain,  France,  or  even,  with  all  due  deference  to 
the  Chancellor,  Germany  heiftelf.  The  facts,  moreover, 
show  that,  in  these  latter  years,  England  has  multiplied 
her  attempts  to  come  to  an  understanding  with  Germany 
on  the  subject  of  limitation  of  naval  armaments  and  that, 


Guardian  of  the  Balance  of  Power       41 

at  the  last  moment,  she  pressed  her  efforts  of  conciliation 
to  the  extreme  limit.  Finally,  it  results  from  the  same 
evidence  of  facts,  for  any  mind  not  biased  by  Germany's 
inordinate  self-esteem,  that  the  "free  development  of 
the  energies"  of  this  people  signified  the  humiliation  of 
Russia,  the  absorption  of  Belgium  and  Holland,  the  dis- 
memberment of  France  with  the  annexation  of  her  colo- 
nies, and  commercial  war  with  England  by  all  and  every 
means,  until  the  continued  increase  of  Germany's  naval 
construction  should  enable  her  to  crush  the  English  fleet 
and  to  complete  her  free  growth  by  the  germanizing  of 
the  British  Colonial  Empire. 

It  was  against  this  danger — without  mentioning  higher 
reasons  of  honour  and  right — that  England  rose,  not 
through  treachery  and  not  without  provocation,  but  to 
reply  to  the  odious  invasion  of  Belgium,  premeditated  in 
time  of  peace  and  undertaken  in  defiance  of  treaties. 

Far-reaching  historical  causes  acquit  England  of  the 
accusation  brought  against  her  by  Herr  von  Bethmann- 
Hollweg,  through  a  false  interpretation  of  the  essential 
principle  of  English  foreign  policy.  We  shall  understand, 
by  the  analysis  of  more  recent  historical  causes,  how  Eng- 
land, after  having  been  long  mistaken  as  to  the  intentions 
of  Germany,  but  finally  compelled  by  facts  and  in  her  own 
defence,  was  obliged,  along  with  other  nations  threatened, 
to  prepare  herself  to  defend  the  balance  of  power  in 
Europe  as  the  fundamental  condition  of  Peace. 


CHAPTER   III 
England  and  tHe  Movement  of  Nationalities 

WITH  the  Revolution  and  the  Wars  of  the  Empire, 
the  Europe  of  former  times  came  to  a  close. 
With  the  edge  of  the  sword  and  some  few  strokes 
of  the  pen,  Napoleon  demolished  the  territorial  unities 
constituting  the  old  Kingdoms.  He,  who  proclaimed  him- 
self the  representative  of  the  French  people,  assembled 
the  nations  into  homogeneous  groups,  according  to  lan- 
guage, race,  and  customs,  in  an  Occident  newly  constructed. 
Just  as  England  had  had  a  "maker  of  kings,"  so  Europe 
had  had  in  Napoleon  a  "maker  of  nations."  Poland 
enjoyed  a  decade  of  existence  once  more.  The  Germanic 
Confederation  made  the  German  people  conscious  of  its 
unity.  The  constitution  of  the  Kingdom  of  Italy  allured 
the  Risorgimento.  Even  the  Servian  nation  was,  for  a 
time,  a  sovereign  power  in  the  province  of  Illyria.  An 
immense  ferment  of  national  aspirations,  the  first  conse- 
quence of  which  was  the  fall  of  Napoleonic  domination, 
stirred  Europe  to  the  depths.  The  great  civilizing  idea, 
borne  onward  in  the  wake  of  the  Imperial  Eagles  and 
imposed  by  force,  caused  a  rebound  of  force.  The  Con- 
gress of  Vienna  threw  Europe,  clarified  by  French  thought, 
back  into  its  former  chaos.  But  the  peoples  of  Europe 
hunted  and  penned  up  like  cattle  at  the  show,  kept  their 
hearts  warm  with  the  longing  for  life  which  had  for  a 
time  inspired  them.  The  history  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 

42 


Movement  of  Nationalities  43 

tury  is  made  up  largely  of  the  efforts  of  nationalities  to 
liberate  and  reconstitute  themselves.  The  principle  of 
nationalities,  principle  of  good  and  evil  like  all  collective 
forces,  becomes  the  great  lever  of  European  history.  With 
the  minor  peoples,  this  principle  is  often  a  force  of  pro- 
gress and  justice.  With  the  great  nations,  it  does  not 
always  justify  the  end  by  the  means.  .  .  .  Late  in  the 
century  the  national  unity  of  Germany,  realized  by  fraud 
and  violence  under  the  whip  of  Prussia,  threatens  to 
become  the  source  of  the  direst  calamities  that  Europe 
has  ever  endured. 

Lapse  of  time  and  the  light  of  facts  permit  us  today 
to  weigh  and  understand  this  principle  of  nationalities. 
It  appears  to  us  of  great  importace  through  its  origin, 
in  which  both  France  and  England  have  had  their  share. 
From  1793  to  1815,  England  set  before  the  world  an 
example  of  ardent,  indomitable  patriotism,  fostered  not 
only  by  instinctive  love  for  the  land  of  her  ancestors, — 
united,  rich,  apd  glorious,  but  also  by  conscious  love  for 
her  institutions  of  liberty.  Revolutionary  France  brought 
to  the  world  that  powerful  enthusiasm  which  strikes 
the  mind  and  excites  imitation.  Through  her  influence, 
the  word  "patriot"  meant  one  who  both  defends  national 
independence  and  who  combats  for  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people.  The  magnificent  Fete  de  la  Federation  in 
which  the  Deputes  of  all  the  provinces,  including  Alsace 
and  Lorraine,  assembled  together  freely  and  solemnly 
to  swear  allegiance  to  "la  France  nouvelle,"  set  up  the 
symbol  of  the  unity  of  a  nation  moved  both  by  what  is 
most  spontaneous  and  most  consciously  willed  within 
the  sentiment  of  solidarity. 

The  noblest  idealism,  however,  may  err.  The  Empire 
coming  after  the  Revolution  is  an  illustration.  France, 
at  least,  atoned  for  her  error  in  the  course  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  by  favouring  the  general  movement  of 


44  Movement  of  Nationalities 

national  emancipation,  which  she  sincerely  believed  to 
be  tending  in  the  direction  of  the  happiness  of  nations 
and  the  peace  of  the  world.  She  found  herself  acting 
with  England,  so  that,  on  several  occasions,  it  was 
possible  to  believe  the  two  great  liberal  nations  destined 
to  co-operate  in  the  regeneration  of  Europe.  Their  union, 
however,  was  only  intermittent,  and  their  action,  whether 
simultaneous  or  separate,  was  not  always  judicious.  The 
reasons  are  that  the  nineteenth  century,  despite  its  gen- 
erous impulses,  was  crossed  by  too  many  antagonistic 
currents,  influenced  by  too  many  contrary  forces,  and 
dominated  by  too  many  heritages  of  the  past  to  permit 
of  its  being  a  period  of  solid  and  lasting  reconstruction. 
The  main  lines  of  direction  which  it  is  possible  to  dis- 
engage today  from  the  confused  history  of  the  century, 
appeared  to  the  eyes  of  contemporaries  as  broken  lines, 
interrupted  by  obstacles  and  thrown  out  of  their  course 
by  forces  of  which  they  did  not  grasp  the  full  significance. 
They  understood  neither  the  full  value  of  the  principle 
of  nationalities,  nor  the  many  dangerous  consequences 
which  might  result  therefrom  in  some  cases.  Indeed, 
the  problems  which,  it  seems  to  us  now,  should  be  solved 
by  the  complete  application  of  the  principle,  were  not 
then  mature.  Prejudices,  passions,  and  the  heavy  politi- 
cal and  diplomatic  heritage  of  preceding  centuries  hin- 
dered the  solutions  which  will  be  imposed  tomorrow  by 
the  force  of  things  and  by  the  natural  action  of  the 
progress  of  ideas. 

Before  understanding  clearly  her  own  thought,  before 
judging  correctly  her  true  interests  and  disengaging  with 
certainty  the  given  axioms  of  the  European  situation, 
England,  uncertain  in  her  attitude,  has  often  hesitated 
between  contrary  motives.  Sometimes  the  principle  of 
the  balance  of  power  interrupts  the  play  of  her  sym- 
pathies for  the  nationalities  struggling  for  their  inde- 


Movement  of  Nationalities  45 

pendence.  Sometimes  her  time-honoured  mistrust,  in  a 
manner  "atavic"  so  to  speak,  thwarts  her  disinterested 
impulses.  At  times  the  feeling  of  her  force,  and  the  desire 
of  asserting  it,  incites  her  to  words  or  movements  of 
defiance  under  cover  of  liberalism.  Sometimes,  on  the 
contrary,  her  liberal  inclinations  prompt  her  to  assume 
a  sort  of  pacific  obstinacy.  Sometimes,  again,  a  popular 
statesman,  owing  to  the  authority  of  his  talent,  of  his 
success,  and  the  "representative  "  character  of  his  thoughts 
and  sentiments,  takes  the  people  along  at  the  mercy  of 
his  policy.  And  at  times  public  opinion  imposes  its  will 
for  action  or  inaction  on  the  Government. 

While  it  is  true  that  the  foreign  policy  of  England  in 
the  nineteenth  century  is  marked  with  fluctuations 
occasionally  disconcerting,  let  us  reflect  upon  the  state 
of  confusion  characterizing  the  interests  and  forces  in 
action  at  that  time  and,  also,  upon  the  novelty  of  the  prob- 
lems demanding  solution.  Not  less  than  a  century,  and 
nothing  short  of  fear,  suffering,  and  bloodshed,  were  nec- 
essary to  bring  order  out  of  this  chaos.  ...  I  shall  attempt 
to  show  that,  in  the  midst  of  these  uncertainties,  English 
egoism  (one  of  the  forces  of  a  vigorous  nation)  has  never 
been  aggressive,  unjust,  and  base,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
two  Germanic  Empires,  destined  as  they  were  to  furnish 
the  spectacle  of  the  self-seeking  instinct  in  its  worst  form. 
Moreover,  egoism  in  England  was  only  one  of  the  motives 
for  action,  counterbalanced  and  often  dominated  as  it 
was  by  a  chivalrous  and  generous  or,  at  least,  always 
prudent  and  opportune  liberalism  which  was  only  waiting 
for  the  maturity  of  years,  the  test  of  facts,  and  the  stimulus 
of  certain  currents  of  thought  in  order  to  develop  into  an 
idealism  resembling  our  own.  The  history  of  England, 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  marks  the  stages  of  a  conver- 
sion. Have  we  not,  we  who  are  French,  passed  through 
similar  vicissitudes ?  Are  we  not  also  converts?  What  a 


46  Movement  of  Nationalities 

distance  separates  us  from  the  era  of  revolutions  and  wars 
which  closed  the  Annee  Terrible!  England  united  to 
France  in  1914  by  a  community  of  ideas,  emotions,  and 
hopes  is  about  as  different  from  "Victorian  England" 
as  the  France  of  the  Third  Republic  from  the  France  of 
the  Second  Empire.  New  factors  of  the  highest  impor- 
tance have  intervened  in  the  life  of  the  two  nations,  and 
have  resulted  in  drawing  them  closer  together.  The  two 
liberal  nations  have  met  on  the  highway  of  their  evolu- 
tion, while  a  reverse  evolution  has  led  Germany  farther 
and  farther  from  the  liberty,  individualism,  and  "human- 
ism" of  Europe.  Even  in  the  hours  of  misunderstanding 
and  abandonment  (which  were  cruel  for  us)  there  was 
no  intellectual  or  moral  gulf  between  England  and  France. 
In  the  midst  of  our  divergences  certain  sympathies  existed 
and  grew  apace,  and  these,  at  the  sudden  revelation  of 
common  danger,  have  enlightened  our  minds  and  united 
our  hearts. 

That,  from  1815  to  1870,  the  two  countries  often  co- 
operated in  view  of  aims  that  were  equally  cherished; 
that,  even  when  England  stood  aloof  and  gave  evidence 
of  indifference,  mistrust,  and  hostility,  facts  and  appear- 
ances seemed  to  justify  her,  and,  that  even  then  dissident 
voices  were  raised  in  defence  of  the  contrary  attitude; 
and  consequently  that,  with  us  or  without  us,  England's 
temper  evolved  so  as  to  become  capable  of  sharing,  in  all 
sincerity,  the  indignation  and  firm  resolve  which  are 
common  to  both  countries  today  .  .  .  such  are  the  results 
which  will  be  made  clear,  I  hope,  from  the  following 
study. 

The  Revolution,  which,  through  its  excess  and  impru- 
dence, had  at  first  determined  in  England  a  movement  of 
reaction  culminating  at  times  in  the  violence  of  a  White 
Terror,  stimulated,  after  1815,  the  revival  and  progress  of 


Movement  of  Nationalities  47 

liberal  ideas.  Not  only  did  the  impetus  given  by  the 
Revolution  bring  about  the  Electoral  Reform  of  1832,  but 
it  was  also  the  Revolution  which  awakened,  among  the 
liberals  once  more  in  power,  a  feeling  of  sympathy  for 
the  nationalities  struggling  for  their  independence.  The 
Liberals  of  1832  were  Whigs,  that  is  to  say,  leaders  of  the 
important  land-owning  families  and  representatives  of 
the  great  manufacturing  class,  and  hence  men  attached 
to  the  traditions  of  the  country,  to  the  national  spirit, 
and  to  the  prerogatives  of  the  directing  oligarchy.  Their 
manner  of  understanding  the  awakening  of  nationalities 
(which  the  people  at  large  shared  with  them)  was  not 
at  all  a  parallel  to  the  French.  Their  initiatives,  which 
sometimes  remained  in  suspense  in  presence  of  obstacles, 
no  doubt  insurmountable  under  the  then  existing  condi- 
tions, were  not  wont  to  lose  sight  of  English  interests. 
They  frequently  failed  to  foresee  ultimate  consequences, 
which,  for  that  matter,  also  escaped  the  perspicacity  of 
the  French.  Later  developments  in  the  history  of  na- 
tions alone  could  reveal  such  consequences.  English 
idealism,  however,  did  not  err  through  lack  of  generosity, 
and,  although  differing  in  essence  from  French  idealism, 
possessed  a  good  deal  in  common  with  it. 

The  cause  of  Hellenic  independence  was  the  first  for 
which  England  and  France  united.  The  sentiments 
inspired  by  the  return  to  antiquity — what  is  called  neo- 
Hellenism — strengthened  the  sentiments  inspired  by  the 
French  Revolution,  thus  arousing  a  powerful  current  of 
sympathy  for  the  Greeks.  The  great  Minister  Canning, 
restorer  of  English  liberalism,  shook  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Alliance  and  prepared  the  movement  of  liberation. 
In  impassioned  stanzas  the  poets  Byron  and  Shelley 
expressed  their  admiration  for  the  sacred  land  of  Greece, 
the  mother  of  liberty,  and  their  ardent  hope  of  seeing  her 
ultimately  delivered  from  an  odious  bondage.  Byron 


48  Movement  of  Nationalities 

atoned  for  the  faults  of  his  life  in  going  to  meet  a  glorious 
death  under  the  walls  of  Missolonghi.  Finally,  at  Nava- 
rino,  in  1827,  the  English  and  French  fleets,  operating  in 
concert,  struck  the  final  blow  against  Turkish  domination. 

The  Revolution  of  1830  had  its  rebound  in  Belgium, 
whose  people,  forcibly  placed  by  the  treaties  of  Vienna 
under  the  Dutch  domination,  rose  in  revolt  and  conquered 
their  independence  with  the  armed  aid  of  England 
and  France.  Generously  France  relinquished  the  long- 
fostered  hope  of  reaching  her  natural  boundaries  and, 
in  accord  with  England,  made  the  Powers  recognize  the 
autonomy  of  Belgium,  henceforth  protected  against  the 
vicissitudes  from  which  she  had  so  long  suffered  by  a 
convention  of  neutrality  thought  to  be  effective.  In  1870, 
Napoleon  III  readily  respected  the  treaty  to  which  France 
had  put  her  signature.  In  1914,  the  Imperial  Chancellor 
of  Germany  contemptuously  discarded  as  a  "scrap  of 
paper"  the  juridical  act  which  Prussia  had  recognized, 
trampled  Belgian  autonomy  under  foot,  and  treated 
the  Belgian  nation  with  the  unqualified  cruelty  which 
calls  for  retribution  today.  England  and  France,  after 
having  founded  Belgium,  will  deliver  her  tomorrow  from 
the  hands  of  her  invaders  and  executioners  and  will  ob- 
tain full  and  complete  reparation  for  her.  Through 
these  Powers  the  principle  of  nationalities,  asserted  in 
1831,  will  be  definitely  and  solemnly  re-established. 

The  movement  of  ideas  in  France  and  the  political 
agitation  which  preceded  the  Revolution  of  1848  had 
their  recoil  in  Italy.  That  country,  which  was  reduced 
to  being,  according  to  Metternich's  cruel  formula,  "only 
a  geographical  expression,"  aspired  to  political  unity  in 
keeping  with  the  glorious  memories  of  the  Roman  Re- 
public, with  the  common  worship  of  Dante,  the  splendour 
of  the  Italian  Renaissance,  still  a  living  recollection,  and 
the  moral,  literary,  and  artistic  kinship  of  a  people  of  the 


Movement  of  Nationalities  49 

same  language,  hopes,  and  desires.  .  .  .  England  had  long 
been  an  admirer  of  Italy.  She  had  voluntarily  sought 
Italian  culture  in  the  sixteenth  century.  Shakespeare 
had  borrowed  from  her  several  of  his  most  stirring  and 
glowing  themes.  Spenser  had  imitated  Ariosto  and  Tasso. 
Milton  had  studied  the  language.  More  recently,  the 
romantic  poets  had  journeyed  to  this  land  of  sunshine, 
luxuriant  vegetation,  and  magnificent  memories  as  to 
some  promised  land.  The  Liberal  Government,  whose 
department  of  Foreign  Affairs  was  directed  by  Palmerston, 
could  not  fail  to  be  interested  in  the  double  movement  of 
political  emancipation  and  national  independence  elo- 
quently expressed  by  the  spokesmen  of  the  Risorgimento. 
Pope  Pius  IX,  who  inaugurated  the  constitutional  move- 
ment in  his  own  States,  made  known  to  the  English  Gov- 
ernment his  desire  "of  having  the  aid  of  a  person  of 
quality  and  experience  capable  of  assisting  him  with  his 
advice  and  of  procuring  him  at  the  same  time  the  moral 
support  of  England."  A  Whig  of  good  family  was  sent 
to  Rome  with  the  supplementary  mission  of  visiting 
Turin  and  Florence  en  route  "for  the  purpose  of  strength- 
ening the  authority  of  the  Constitutional  Government 
in  Italy." 

The  insurrection,  which  soon  broke  out,  did  not  succeed. 
It  was  not  till  ten  years  later  that  the  Kingdom  of  Sar- 
dinia, after  having  gained  the  active  friendship  of  France 
and  England  on  the  battlefields  of  the  Crimea,  was  able 
to  resume  the  struggle.  The  victories  of  Magenta  and 
of  Solferino,  won  by  the  French  armies  who  had  hastened 
to  the  aid  of  the  Sardinians,  stripped  Austria  of  the  pro- 
vince of  Lombardy.  In  England,  the  general  elections 
were  taking  place  at  this  moment:  questions  of  home 
policy  were  much  less  at  stake  than  the  shaping  of  the 
foreign  policy,  to  wit: — whether  the  Liberals  who  were 
in  favour  of  the  Italian  Revolution  would  carry  the  day 


5<>.  Movement  of  Nationalities 

against  the  Conservatives  in  favour  of  Austria.  Victory 
remained  in  the  hands  of  the  Liberals.  Palmerston 
reassumed  the  portfolio  of  Foreign  Affairs;  sympathy  for 
Italy  manifested  itself  with  enthusiasm.  But  this  sym- 
pathy was  platonic,  for  England,  whose  scant  military 
resources  had  just  been  exhausted  by  the  Crimean  War, 
was  incapable  of  engaging  in  another  campaign.  Soon, 
however,  events  shaped  themselves  in  such  a  way  that 
England  had  the  opportunity  of  serving  young  Italy 
and  winning  her  lasting  gratitude,  at  the  very  time  when 
France,  despite  sacrifices  and  bloodshed,  was  on  the 
point  of  losing  it. 

It  is  well  known  that  Napoleon  III  did  not  follow  up 
the  advantage  which  the  victory  of  Solferino  gave  him. 
The  sensitiveness  of  the  man  responsible  for  the  2  De- 
cembre  had  been  deeply  stirred,  it  is  said,  at  the  spectacle 
of  the  battlefield.  Furthermore,  a  stronger  reason  was 
that  Prussia  threatened  to  intervene  and  was  mobilizing 
on  the  banks  of  the  Rhine.  Victor-Emmanuel  had  to 
be  satisfied  with  Milan,  Venitia  remaining  in  the  hands 
of  the  Austrians.  The  deception  of  the  Italians  was 
very  marked:  their  gratitude  was  to  be  all  the  greater 
for  those  who  would  permit  them  to  complete  the  work 
of  national  unity.  In  bringing  about  the  desired  result, 
England  played  an  important  part,  and,  on  this  occasion, 
reaped  the  benefit  of  lasting  Italian  friendship,  as  strong 
today  as  then.  In  the  negotiations  which  followed  the 
Peace  of  Villafranca,  European  diplomacy  was  princi- 
pally concerned  with  the  following  question:  should  the 
Central  States  of  Italy,  including  a  part  of  the  Papal 
territory,  be  allowed  to  unite  with  Piedmont.  Austria 
was  opposed  to  the  proposition;  Napoleon  III,  with  the 
idea  of  treating  the  Catholic  party  in  France  with  cir- 
cumspection, was  ill-disposed  toward  it.  In  England, 
the  Queen  and  the  Prince  Consort  were  in  sympathy  with 


Movement  of  Nationalities  51 

the  dispossessed  monarchy.  It  was  under  these  circum- 
stances that  Lord  Russell,  Prime  Minister,  and  Lord 
Palmerston,  Foreign  Secretary,  received  the  powerful 
support  of  Gladstone  for  their  pro-Italian  policy.  Up 
to  that  time,  Gladstone  had  been  sitting  on  the  Conser- 
vative benches  where  his  talent  and  fire  and  the  generosity 
of  his  spirit  had  brought  him  into  public  notice.  It  is 
highly  probable  that  his  enthusiasm  for  the  liberty  of 
nations  determined  his  conversion  to  liberalism.  In  fact 
his  conversion  had  already  begun.  ...  A  year  before, 
having  been  sent  as  special  commissioner  to  the  Ionian 
Islands,  an  English  Protectorate  since  1815,  now  demand- 
ing liberation  and  union  to  Greece,  Gladstone  had  re- 
turned a  convert  to  the  cause  of  Ionian  emancipation 
and  had  won  the  Parliament  over  to  his  opinion  despite 
violent  opposition.  In  1859,  in  order  to  defend  Italian 
unity,  he  transferred  his  political  allegiance  and  accepted 
a  portfolio  in  the  Russell  Cabinet,  inaugurating  by  this 
act  a  long  career  of  liberal  idealism.  The  Cabinet, 
thus  reinforced,  insisted,  through  its  diplomatic  channels, 
upon  the  right  of  the  Italian  people  to  settle  its  destinies 
for  itself,  and  finally  won  the  day.  Then,  when  France 
asked  England  to  oppose,  through  the  action  of  their 
united  fleets,  the  passage  of  Garibaldi  and  the  Thousand 
from  Sicily  to  the  Kingdom  of  Naples,  England  refused. 
The  expedition  took  place,  succeeded,  and  allowed  Victor- 
Emmanuel  to  assemble  into  a  single  group  all  of  the  prin- 
cipalities of  Italy,  except  Venitia  and  Rome.  How,  in 
1866,  Prussia  allowed  Italy  to  complete  her  task  of  national 
unification,  and  thus  gain  her  goodwill  and  alliance 
later  on,  I  shall  merely  recall  as  a  passing  note. 

Two  other  attempts  at  national  enfranchisement 
which,  encountering  insuperable  obstacles,  were  doomed 
to  failure,  were  watched  with  a  kindly  eye  by  Palmerston 's 


52  Movement  of  Nationalities 

government  and  with  ardent  sympathy  by  the  English 
people:  these  were  the  attempts  of  Hungary  and  Poland. 
In  the  two  cases,  differences  of  opinion  in  Parliament 
and  the  gravity  of  the  risks  to  be  encountered  confined 
English  goodwill  to  acts  of  simple  manifestation.  The 
pressure  of  reality  brought  English  idealism  under  its 
stern  law,  as  it  had  done  under  similar  circumstances 
in  the  case  of  French  idealism  despite  its  strong  inclina- 
tion to  acknowledge  the  independence  of  Poland. 

In  1849  the  Hungarians  had  succeeded  in  loosening 
the  Austrian  yoke.  The  composite  monarchy  of  the 
Hapsburgs  was  threatened  with  disintegration.  When 
Russia  intervened  for  the  purpose  of  re-establishing  the 
Emperor-King's  absolute  power  and  of  crushing  a  re- 
volutionary movement  likely  to  set  so  bad  an  example, 
England  was  rilled  with  indignation.  The  patriot  Kos- 
suth  arrived  in  London  where  he  was  acclaimed  as  a 
hero.  Kossuth  had  a  magnificent  bearing  and  brilliant 
oratorical  powers.  He  had  studied  English  in  the  works 
of  Shakespeare,  and  it  was  in  Shakespeare's  language, 
so  powerful  in  its  expressive  concentration  and  so  stir- 
ring for  English  ears,  that  he  addressed  his  audiences. 
The  Austrian  Ambassador  at  London  remonstrated  with 
the  Government.  .  .  .  Palmerston,  as  a  man,  had  a 
decided  leaning  towards  the  national  assertive  spirit 
and  was  very  sensitive  as  well  to  the  manifestations 
of  popular  sentiment.  As  a  Cabinet  Minister,  he  had  to 
concern  himself  with  the  consequences  of  over-significant 
demonstrations  in  which  the  Government  might  have  ap- 
peared to  participate.  Kossuth  had  solicited  an  official 
audience.  The  Prime  Minister,  Lord  Russell,  intervened 
when  Palmerston,  in  a  moment  of  generous,  but  incon- 
siderate sympathy,  was  on  the  point  of  yielding.  The 
audience  was  refused. 

Little    by    little    the    popular    enthusiasm    subsided. 


Movement  of  Nationalities  53 

Kossuth  .fell  into  obscurity  again.  England,  however, 
did  everything  that  was  consistent  with  the  prudence 
necessary  for  maintaining  peace.  Several  thousands  of 
Hungarian  patriots  had  succeeded  in  fleeing  and  in  find- 
ing refuge  in  Turkey.  They  were  threatened  with  terrible 
reprisals.  Austria  and  Russia,  conjointly,  exacted  from 
Turkey  the  surrender  of  the  rebels.  The  energetic  in- 
tervention of  England  saved  them. 

England,  ill-prepared  for  a  military  campaign  owing 
to  the  insufficiency  of  her  land  forces,  had  hesitated 
about  attacking  a  continental  Power  well-nigh  inaccessible 
from  the  sea.  When,  four  years  later,  in  her  dispute 
with  Russia,  she  did  pursue  her  warlike  purpose  to  the 
extreme  limit,  it  was  because  her  traditional  hostility 
towards  despotism  was,  on  that  occasion,  in  harmony 
with  the  need  of  defending  her  vital  interests.  Those 
two  conditions  must  be  fulfilled  before  a  nation,  whose 
destinies  are  wisely  directed,  may  be  allowed  to  engage 
in  the  perilous  adventure  of  a  decision  by  arms.  Just 
the  same,  as  J.  S.  Mill  wrote  after  the  Crimean  War,  had 
England  resolutely  opposed  Russian  intervention  against 
Hungary,  she  would  have  fought  under  more  favourable 
conditions  against  the  conquering  autocracy  of  the  Czar 
and  would  have  furthered  the  progress  of  liberal  ideas 
more  effectually.  Let  us  add  that  Hungary,  as  a  free 
and  liberal  country,  would  not,  perhaps,  have  been,  as 
she  is  today,  swept  away  by  the  imperialistic  folly  of 
Germanism,  nor  would  she  have  furnished  the  sorry 
spectacle  of  a  nation,  but  recently  freed,  bent  upon 
enslaving  another. 

The  Poles,  in  1862-63,  gave  proof  of  admirable  courage 
in  their  struggle  against  Russia  to  get  her  to  respect  the 
Constitution  which  had  been  granted  them  by  the  Treaty 
of  Vienna.  The  wooded  parts  of  Poland  became  just 
so  many  centres  of  guerrilla  warfare  which  a  considerable 


54  Movement  of  Nationalities 

armed  force  and  cruel  measures  of  oppression  failed  to 
suppress.  Prussia  favoured  the  action  of  Russia  by  allow- 
ing the  right  of  pursuit  on  her  territory.  Was  Europe 
going  to  allow  the  crushing  of  valorous  Poland,  who  was 
so  nobly  defending  the  rights  of  her  people  to  live  free 
and  independent?  The  Polish  patriots  continued  the 
struggle  without  weakness,  despite  the  sufferings  endured 
and  the  terrible  gaps  made  in  their  ranks,  in  the  hope  of 
foreign  intervention.  Napoleon  III  proposed  common 
action  with  England.  In  Parliament,  speeches  full  of 
ardent  sympathy  were  pronounced  by  orators  of  all 
parties.  Liberals  and  Conservatives  were  united  in  a 
common  spirit  of  admiration  for  the  insurgents  and  of 
indignation  for  the  oppressors;  differences  of  opinion 
disappeared  beneath  the  unanimous  enthusiasm  for  the 
noblest  of  causes,  the  cause  of  nationalities  and  liberty. 

It  seemed  that  England  had  a  definite  reason  for  inter- 
vening since  she  had  signed  the  Treaty  of  Vienna  with  the 
clause  conferring  the  benefit  of  a  constitution  on  Poland. 
Lord  Russell  went  as  far  as  to  write  a  note,  in  conjunction 
with  France,  which  drew  the  attention  of  the  Russian 
Government  to  six  points  deemed  necessary  to  bring 
about  the  pacification  of  the  country:  amnesty,  national 
representation,  Polish  administrators,  liberty  of  con- 
science, admission  of  Polish  as  the  official  language,  and 
regulation  of  military  service.  The  sending  of  this 
note  seemed  to  be  the  forerunner  of  an  ultimatum :  France 
and  England  were  waiting  anxiously,  when  it  was  sud- 
denly made  known  that  the  Anglo-French  understanding 
was  at  an  end.  The  Poles  were  left  to  their  unhappy  fate. 
.  .  .  What  had  happened? 

We  know  today  that  it  was  Lord  Palmerston  who  was 
responsible  for  the  failure  of  the  intervention  project. 
Despite  the  recent  co-operation  of  the  French  and  English 
armies  in  the  Crimean  War,  Lord  Palmerston  had  con- 


Movement  of  Nationalities  55 

ceived  a  certain  mistrust  for  Napoleon  III,  and,  whether 
his  reasons  were  true  or  false,  feared  to  engage  England 
in  a  common  action  with  France  which  might  have  tied 
his  hands  for  the  future.  This  failure  to  intervene  in 
favour  of  Poland  is  closely  related  to  the  question  of 
England's  attitude  towards  the  Second  Empire  .  .  . 
a  question  which  I  am  now  ready  to  discuss. 

A  complex  and  confused  epoch,  an  epoch  of  great 
national  movements  and  of  serious  political  upheavals, 
an  epoch  still  in  close  touch  with  the  long  struggle  of 
twenty-two  years  which  had  transformed  Europe  into 
an  immense  battlefield,  the  nineteenth  century  is  singu- 
larly influenced  by  forces  working  in  opposite  directions: 
desires  for  peace  which  announce  the  future  and  warlike 
aspirations  which  recall  the  past.  In  England,  contrary- 
forces  determine  sudden  and  strange  fluctuations  of 
opinion.  In  France,  revolutions  break  forth,  then  order 
is  re-established  in  the  wake  of  lassitude  and  submission. 
During  whole  periods,  the  peaceful  enterprises  of  industry, 
of  commerce  and  the  arts,  hold  the  attention,  then,  of  a 
sudden,  crises  arise  wherein  the  latent  energies  of  the 
grande  epopee  are  awakened.  These  fluctuations  taking 
place  within  both  countries,  complicate  and  sometimes 
embroil  their  relations.  Let  us  not  be  surprised  that 
exterior  variations  correspond  to  these  interior  changes. 
It  is  also  true,  on  the  other  hand,  that,  despite  faults  and 
prejudices  on  either  side,  something  always  remained  as 
a  possible  basis  of  understanding :  the  underlying  currents 
of  thought,  the  common  but  perhaps  ignored  body  of 
ideals,  and  the  forces  of  vigorous  and  healthy  reason 
necessary  for  the  eventual  reconstruction  of  the  union. 

England  greeted  sympathetically  the  accession  of  the 
Monarchy  of  July,  which  seemed  destined  to  put  an  end 
to  revolutionary  agitation  in  giving  France  a  government 


56  Movement  of  Nationalities 

in  which  the  progressive  and  conservative  forces  counter- 
balanced each  other  advantageously  as  in  the  English 
Constitution.  The  English  oligarchy  directing  affairs 
considered  the  French  bourgeoisie  selected  by  the  cens 
(electoral  qualifications)  as  both  a  liberal  and  well-poised 
class,  similar  to  itself,  with  which  an  understanding  might 
be  arrived  at.  It  was  under  Louis-Philippe  that  the 
Entente  Cordiale  was  inaugurated — the  Entente  Cordiale 
which  was  destined,  after  so  many  dissensions,  to  reappear 
in  1904  for  the  salvation  of  Europe.  A  long  period  of 
good  feeling  and  goodwill  seemed  to  have  begun,  when, 
in  1840,  a  storm-cloud  crossed  the  atmosphere  of  peace. 
The  Khedive  of  Egypt,  Mehemet-Ali,  thanks  to  his 
military  and  administrative  qualities,  had  succeeded  in 
becoming  practically  independent  of  the  decadent  suze- 
rainty of  Constantinople.  His  armies  had  entered  Syria; 
his  fleet  held  the  sea;  he  was  on  the  road  to  complete 
independence  and  a  career  of  conquest.  England  and 
Russia  became  anxious.  These  two  great  Powers,  united 
for  a  while  against  Napoleon,  had  become  rivals  again 
after  the  fall  of  the  Empire,  owing  to  the  Asiatic  and 
Oriental  questions.  Their  jealousy  could  not  allow 
Egypt,  the  key  of  Asia,  to  establish  herself  as  an  indepen- 
dent power  and  perhaps  in  the  near  future  as  a  conquer- 
ing power.  Both  had  interests  in  maintaining,  at  least 
temporarily,  the  integrity  of  the  Ottoman  Empire.  This 
jealous  interest  led  them  to  co-operate  against  a  common 
danger;  Austria  and  Prussia  joined  them  and  Mehemet- 
Ali  was  threatened  both  by  land  and  sea. 

France  considered  herself,  traditionally,  as  the  defender 
of  Egypt;  the  coalition  not  only  hurt  her  interests,  but 
had  been  constituted  without  her  being  warned.  She 
felt  deeply  offended  about  the  matter;  it  was  the  occasion 
all  over  the  country  for  the  awakening  of  the  warlike 
spirit.  Louis-Philippe  and  Guizot,  leaders  with  pacific 


Movement  of  Nationalities  57 

tendencies,  avoided  war;  but  a  keen  dissatisfaction  lurked 
in  the  advanced  party.  Through  some  strange  error, 
this  advanced  party  placed  the  republican  ideal  and  the 
warlike  ideal  on  the  same  high  level  of  veneration.  Roy- 
alty of  the  bourgeois  type  appeared  commonplace  and 
colourless  in  the  light  of  Napoleonic  glory.  Viewed  from 
this  distance,  the  Empire  was  to  be  remembered  for  what 
it  embodied  of  the  democratic  order  of  things  and  for  the 
lustre  it  had  shed  on  France,  in  the  hour  of  its  splendid 
successes.  The  Government  itself  had  imprudently 
furthered  the  awakening  by  bringing  home  from  Saint 
Helena  the  ashes  of  the  Emperor.  Once  set  on  foot,  the 
movement  continued  irresistibly.  For  a  while  it  was 
possible  to  consider  France  as  having  become  a  danger 
for  Europe  once  more. 

The  first  and  most  serious  counterstroke  of  this  agita- 
tion was  a  menacing  explosion  of  patriotic  fury  in  Ger- 
many. Hatred  of  France,  which  Fichte  had  imparted 
to  the  youth  of  the  universities  on  the  morrow  of  the 
battle  of  Jena,  took  possession  of  the  entire  nation  once 
again.  Schneckenbiirger  composed  Die  Wacht  am  Rhein 
which  flew  from  mouth  to  mouth  as  the  rally  song  of 
German  patriotism.  It  is  to  this  epoch  that  one  may 
ascribe  the  moral  union  of  Germany,  hitherto  divided, 
as  well  as  the  aggressive  spirit  which  permeated  hence- 
forth her  aspirations  for  unity,  and  the  worship  of 
militarism  which  was  soon  to  drive  the  whole  country 
into  the  arms  of  Prussia. 

Another,  though  less  violent,  counterstroke  made  it- 
self felt  in  England.  But  in  this  country  of  free  opinion 
and  liberal  institutions,  where  peace  ideals  and  humani- 
tarian doctrines  were  already  at  work,  and  where  mili- 
tarism was  hated,  the  warlike  spirit  never  reached  a 
dangerous  pitch.  It  was  the  Whigs,  and,  among  them 
especially  the  restless,  buoyant  personality  of  Palmerston 


58  Movement  of  Nationalities 

that  represented  bellicose  tendencies.  The  Whigs  had 
made  the  Great  War  their  war,  and  liked  to  pose  as  the 
liberators  of  nations.  They  were  proud  to  claim  for 
England,  in  the  eyes  of  the  other  peoples  freed  from  the 
Napoleonic  yoke,  the  glory  of  having  founded  English 
liberty  and  of  having  rejuvenated  and  perfected  it  by  the 
Reform  Bill  in  1832.  In  the  muscular,  eupeptic,  strong- 
willed  Englishman,  there  is  a  vein  of  authoritativeness 
and  pugnacity,  which  expresses  itself  at  certain  periods 
of  prosperity  and  national  prestige  in  the  form  of  im- 
perious collective  pride.  This  outflow  of  national  pride 
was  not  yet  tempered,  as  it  is  today,  by  the  advance  of 
rational  idealism  and  the  parallel  decline  (which  has 
been  very  noticeable  in  the  last  fifteen  years)  of  British 
insularity.  The  Whigs  represented  the  haughty,  rather 
domineering  traditions  of  England  lording  it  over  Europe. 
Palmerston  used  to  assert,  in  the  ringing  tones  of  the  coun- 
try squire,  that  he  was  well-fed,  ruddy-faced,  tanned  with 
hunting  and  that  "man  is  a  fighting  and  quarrelling 
animal."  It  is  he  and  his  party  who  resorted  to  brow- 
beating and  surly-speaking  towards  France — France, 
who  was  neither  quite  innocent  nor  so  guilty  as  they 
accused  her  of  being. 

On  the  contrary  the  Tories,  through  a  spirit  of  opposi- 
tion, represented  for  a  certain  time  the  appeasing  and 
restraining  forces — until,  later  on,  the  Liberals  having 
become  pacific,  the  Tories  assumed  once  more  an  imperious 
and  imperialistic  tone.  In  1840,  the  progressive  fraction 
of  the  Conservative  party  having  risen  to  power,  Sir 
Robert  Peel,  its  leader,  pronounced  certain  words  of 
peace.  ' '  The  time  has  perhaps  come, ' '  said  he,  "  when  the 
European  Powers  ought  to  reduce  their  military  forces. 
The  veritable  interest  of  Europe  is  to  consummate  some 
common  understanding  in  such  a  way  as  to  permit  each 
country  to  diminish  its  armaments,  which  belong  to  a 


Movement  of  Nationalities  59 

state  of  war  rather  than  to  a  state  of  peace."  In  1851 
the  Grand  International  Exhibition  of  London  took 
place.  Thanks  to  the  efforts  of  Prince  Albert,  a  mild 
and  thoughtful  man,  the  Exhibition  authorities  convoked 
a  Peace  Congress  in  the  Capital.  The  plan  did  not  meet 
the  approbation  of  Palmerston:  he  declared  that  it  "did 
violence  to  the  insular  spirit  of  the  nation  and  savoured 
of  humanitarianism."  This  Peace  Congress  was  destined, 
in  effect,  to  usher  in,  despite  the  intention  of  its  authors, 
a  long  period  of  war,  in  which  France  henceforth  under 
the  direction  of  Napoleon  III  was  going  to  play  one  of 
the  leading  parts  and  in  which  England  was  going  to 
be  implicated  on  one  occasion. 

The  conflict  in  which  England  took  part  was  the  Cri- 
mean War,  in  which  she  fought  side  by  side  with  France. 
It  was  a  long  sanguinary  war  wherein  the  lack  of  or- 
ganization often  put  the  combatants  to  a  terrible  test. 
England,  at  the  instigation  of  Palmerston,  was  the  real 
author  responsible  for  this  conflict  in  which  she  decided 
to  engage,  partly  through  liberal  idealism  and  partly  to 
defend  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe.  Russia,  espe- 
cially since  her  intervention  against  the  Hungarian  in- 
surrection, represented,  in  the  eyes  of  the  English  Liberals 
the  fortress  of  despotism.  Furthermore,  the  apparent 
design  of  Nicolas  to  assume  the  protection  of  the  Christians 
of  the  Orient  in  order  to  weaken  Turkey  and  to  usurp  her 
place  in  Europe,  could  not  leave  England  indifferent  in 
the  matter.  Did  Russia  really  threaten  to  play  the  part 
of  a  conquering  invader  in  Europe?  Or  was  England  too 
prompt  to  take  alarm  through  fear  of  having  too  powerful 
a  rival  in  the  Orient  and  in  Asia?  It  is  a  difficult  matter 
to  decide.  At  any  rate,  Napoleon  allowed  himself  to 
be  drawn  into  the  war  easily  enough,  feeling  as  he  did 
that  his  position  on  the  throne  could  be  consolidated  only 
if  he  succeeded  in  dazzling  the  French  by  his  military 


60  Movement  of  Nationalities 

successes  and  by  the  illusion  of  former  glories.  The 
victory  of  the  Allies  did  not  benefit  the  principle  of 
nationalities  in  the  Balkans  as  much  as  it  should  have 
done;  moreover,  the  rancour  of  Russia  was  soon  going  to 
serve  the  designs  of  Prussia  who  was  already  preparing 
in  silence. 


The  alliance  for  common  action  in  the  Crimea  was 
only  a  short  episode  in  the  Franco-English  relations  under 
the  Second  Empire.  Taken  all  in  all,  the  restoration  of 
imperialism  in  France  marked  the  beginning  of  a  period 
in  which  England  distrusted  our  purposes.  The  recol- 
lection of  the  Napoleonic  danger  was  still  too  fresh  in  the 
minds  of  those  on  the  other  side  of  the  Channel,  to  allow 
the  renewed  cult  of  the  Emperor,  personified  in  his  de- 
scendant, to  arise  without  alarm.  The  history  of  Eng- 
land during  the  next  eighteen  years  (1854-1872)  is  to  be 
characterized  by  a  series  of  panics,  followed  by  short 
periods  of  appeasement. 

As  early  as  1852,  Palmerston  entered  upon  a  campaign 
in  favour  of  an  increase  in  armaments.  He  pronounced 
the  famous  saying:  "The  application  of  steam  to  naviga- 
tion has  thrown  a  bridge  across  the  Channel."  Accord- 
ing to  him,  England  was  no  longer  safe  from  invasion :  she 
ought  to  forearm.  The  result  was  that  the  Cabinet  had  a 
law  passed  for  the  strengthening  of  the  militia  and  the  in- 
crease of  the  fleet.  ...  In  1859,  the  Peace  of  Villafranca, 
which  guaranteed  us  the  possession  of  Savoy  and  Nice, 
irritated  England.  It  was  not  so  much  the  fact  of  this 
slight  aggrandizement  which  disturbed  that  country  as  the 
project  of  a  policy  of  conquest,  whose  revival  seemed 
noticeable  in  France  and  which,  it  was  imagined,  would 
surely  not  be  limited  to  these  modest  acquisitions.  Right 
or  wrong,  Napoleon  III  was  supposed  to  harbour  the  Ma- 


Movement  of  Nationalities  61 

chiavellian  scheme  of  having  Sardinia  ceded  to  him  in  ex- 
change for  his  consent  to  the  completion  of  Italian  unity. 
Even  the  discontent  of  the  Italian  patriots,  frustrated  at 
the  moment  in  which  they  believed  their  hope  realized, 
reacted  painfully  on  the  English  sentiment.  And  so 
the  Liberals  and  Conservatives  were  seen  to  unite  for  the 
purpose  of  demanding  guarantees  against  the  "over- 
channel"  neighbour,  suspected  of  occult  designs.  It  was 
in  vain  that  the  voice  of  the  radical  and  free-trader 
Cobden,  desirous  of  concluding  a  commercial  treaty  with 
France,  sought  to  calm  the  agitation:  throughout  the 
whole  country  the  volunteer  movement  was  well  launched 
as  well  as  the  formation  of  rifle  corps  destined  to  become 
one  of  the  aspects  of  the  defensive  organization  of  England. 

The  commercial  treaty,  signed  in  1860,  did  not  end  the 
alarmist  agitation.  In  that  year  the  naval  budget  was 
increased  twenty-five  millions.  Yet  like  the  preceding 
panics,  this  one  only  resulted  in  strengthening  the  de- 
fences of  England.  France  never  had  to  fear  an  actual 
attack  launched  from  over  the  Channel.  Nevertheless, 
this  distrust  of  French  imperialism  had  considerable 
influence  in  determining  England's  attitude  in  the  grave 
events  which  were  to  characterize  the  end  of  the  reign 
of  Napoleon  III. 

It  was  this  hostile  reserve,  maintained  especially  by 
Palmerston,  which  prevented  the  concerted  intervention 
of  France  and  England  in  favour  of  Poland  in  1863.  .  .  . 
A  year  later  the  affair  of  the  Danish  dukedoms  exploded. 
England  out  of  instinctive  sympathy  for  the  small  states 
molested  by  the  big  one  was  in  favour  of  Denmark. 
Napoleon  III,  partly  irritated  at  the  recent  refusal  of 
England  at  the  time  of  the  Polish  crises  and  partly  carried 
away  by  a  spirit  of  naive  sentimentality  to  favour  German 
unity  even  against  his  own  interests,  supported  the  plans 
of  Prussia  and  Austria  to  unite  Schleswig-Holstein  to  the 


62  Movement  of  Nationalities 

Germanic  Confederation  by  force.  Duped  on  a  former 
occasion  by  Bismarck,  Napoleon  III  was  to  be  duped 
again  more  seriously  on  the  morrow  of  Sadowa.  The 
Iron  Chancellor  had  succeeded  in  isolating  France;  there 
was  nothing  else  to  be  done  but  to  take  her  in  the  snare 
and  then  to  crush  her. 

The  imposture  of  the  Ems  dispatch  is  well  known. 
What  is  less  so,  is  the  no  less  odious  treachery  by  which 
Bismarck  secured  the  neutrality  of  England  in  the  impend- 
ing aggression.  Relying  on  the  sympathy  which  Queen 
Victoria,  born  of  a  German  mother,  brought  up  in  the 
German  fashion  and  married  to  a  prince  of  Saxe-Coburg, 
professed  for  Germany,  Bismarck  succeeded  in  persuading 
the  English  Ministry  of  the  perfect  innocence  of  his  in- 
tentions, while  at  the  same  time,  skilfully  exciting  English 
fears  in  regard  to  Napoleon  Ill's  supposed  designs  of 
aggrandizement.  In  one  particular  he  touched  a  very 
sensitive  cord  in  representing  the  Emperor  as  ambitious 
of  acquiring  Belgium.  To  support  his  accusation,  a 
proof  was  necessary:  it  did  not  take  him  very  long  to 
obtain  it.  In  the  course  of  the  negotiations  which  he 
pretended  to  pursue  with  our  Ambassador  at  Berlin, 
Benedetti,  the  conversation  happened  to  turn  one  day 
upon  the  advantages  which  France  might  gain  from  an 
alliance  with  Prussia.  It  has  since  been  learned  how 
far  such  a  scheme  was  removed  from  his  thoughts,  and 
what  a  clumsy  enticement  he  held  out  to  our  representa- 
tive. It  is  the  business  of  diplomats,  however,  to  discuss 
matters.  Benedetti  talked — an  excellent  idea  in  itself: 
but  he  was  also  foolish  enough  to  write.  Bismarck,  in 
an  engaging  tone  which  he  knew  how  to  assume  to  cajole 
his  victims,  requested  Benedetti,  at  a  convenient  turn  in 
the  conversation,  to  take  up  a  pen  and  write  down  under 
his  dictation,  certain  purely  hypothetical  propositions, 


Movement  of  Nationalities  63 

presented  as  perhaps  possible  but  scarcely  probable 
assumptions,  of  a  problem  whose  solution  was  not  dis- 
cernible. Among  others  these  propositions  postulated 
the  occupation  of  Belgium  by  France.  Scarcely  had  this 
rough  draft  been  drawn  up,  when  Bismarck  declared,  with 
a  good-natured  laugh,  that  it  was  a  mere  whim  of  his, 
a  diplomatic  game,  of  which  it  would  be  wiser  not  to  speak 
any  more.  Then  he  threw  the  thing  into  the  paper 
basket.  ...  It  was  carefully  picked  out  later  .  .  . 
and  this  was  the  document,  in  Benedetti's  writing,  which 
was  presented  to  Gladstone  to  get  him  to  deliver  France 
into  the  claws  of  Prussia. 

Gladstone,  the  new  leader  of  English  liberalism  since 
the  death  of  Palmerston,  was  as  well-poised,  thoughtful, 
and  pacific  as  his  predecessor  had  been  combative,  mischief- 
making,  and  bustling.  His  policy  was  made  up  of  econ- 
omy, of  democratic  reforms,  of  justice  with  regard  to 
Ireland,  and  of  measures  in  favour  of  industrial  and 
commercial  prosperity.  It  is  conceivable  that  the  dis- 
trust which  he  noticed  in  England  with  regard  to  France 
and  which  Napoleon  had  not  been  able  to  dissipate,  to- 
gether with  his  desire  for  non-intervention  and  the  sup- 
posed proof  produced  by  Bismarck,  should  have  deterred 
him  from  coming  to  our  assistance.  He  hastened  to 
shut  himself  up  in  the  attitude  which  he  had  defined  him- 
self as  the  most  profitable  for  England,  that  which  he 
expressed  by  the  formula  of  "splendid  isolation." 

The  English  Government  was  quite  unable,  in  1870, 
to  perceive  the  German  peril.  We  must  not  be  surprised 
at  it.  France  herself  had  become  aware  of  it  only  when 
it  was  too  late  to  escape.  Prophetic  voices,  notwith- 
standing, had  been  raised  long  before  Bismarck  and  King 
William  had  formed  the  project  of  throwing  the  hatred 
of  France  as  a  bait  to  Germany  engaged  in  the  labour  of 
unity.  As  early  as  1831,  Edgar  Quinet,  who  knew  Ger- 


64  Movement  of  Nationalities 

many  well,  had  revealed,  in  an  article  in  the  Revue  des 
Deux  Mondes  the  surprising  change  which  had  come  over 
the  country.  Germany  was  no  longer  the  land  of  fancy, 
of  metaphysics  and  patriarchal  customs;  she  was  seized 
with  a  violent  thirst  for  action;  the  ancient  splendours 
of  the  contemplative  life  had  paled  in  the  harsh  light  of 
the  rising  hope  of  unity! 

It  is  especially  in  Prussia  [added  he]  that  the  old-time 
impartiality  and  political  cosmopolitanism  have  given  place 
to  an  irritable  and  choleric  nationalism.  It  is  in  Prussia 
that  the  popular  party  first  made  peace  with  the  authority 
in  power.  Effectively,  this  government  is  giving  Germany 
today  what  she  is  most  eager  to  have,  namely,  action,  actual, 
tangible  life,  and  social  initiative.  The  government  is  satis- 
fying, beyond  all  measure,  her  sudden  infatuation  for  power 
and  material  force.  .  .  .  Hence  at  this  hour  the  North  is 
occupied  in  making  Prussia  its  instrument.  Yes,  if  Prussia 
were  allowed  to  have  her  way,  the  North  would  drive  her 
slowly  from  behind  to  the  murder  of  the  ancient  Kingdom  of 
France. 

Thus,  forty  years  before  the  catastrophe  of  1870,  E. 
Quinet  foresaw  the  coming  threat  and  how  it  was  to  be 
realized.  He  alone,  among  the  idealists,  was  a  keen 
enough  observer  and  clear-sighted  enough  to  understand 
that  the  principle  of  nationalities,  if  out  of  harmony  with 
the  liberal  and  humanitarian  spirit  of  the  English  Constitu- 
tion and  the  French  Revolution  and  if,  on  the  other  hand, 
exploited  by  the  despotism  of  a  militaristic  State,  would 
become  a  danger  for  Europe  and  the  very  idea  of  liberty. 
After  the  Danish  affair  and  after  Sadowa,  he  reiterated 
his  warnings;  and  he  was  no  longer  alone  in  sounding 
the  alarm.  Louis  Blanc  (Six  Ans  d'Histoire  Anglaise) 
foresaw  the  peril,  not  alone  for  France  but  for  England 
also. 


Movement  of  Nationalities  65 

In  comparison  with  the  gigantic  struggles  [he  writes]  which 
armed  Germany  would  be  in  a  condition  to  provoke  and  sus- 
tain, the  wars  of  the  French  Revolution  and  of  the  Empire 
would  appear  no  more  than  child's  play.  .  .  .  Germany 
organized  militarily  and  provided  with  a  fleet  would  be  nearer 
universal  domination  than  France  ever  was. 

Nevertheless,  Napoleon  III,  sentimental  and  short- 
sighted, ambitious  and  pusillanimous,  allowed  himself 
to  be  duped  by  Bismarck,  neglecting  to  prepare  himself 
for  the  more  and  more  inevitable  shock  and  playing  his 
hand  heavily  by  alternate  strokes  of  diplomacy  and 
intimidation.  The  conflict  exploded.  Prussia  seemed 
to  play  the  beau  role.  England  saw  only  the  superficial 
aspect  of  things  and  allowed  us  to  be  crushed,  being  too 
absorbed  in  her  own  affairs  to  try  to  fathom  the  reality 
under  the  surface  of  things.  Gladstone  published  anony- 
mously in  the  Edinburgh  Review  an  article  on  Happy 
England,  belted  with  the  silver  sash  of  the  seas.  In  his 
eyes,  as  in  those  of  the  majority  of  his  countrymen,  we 
bore  the  blemish  of  imperialism  which  signified  denial  of 
liberty  and  also  ambition  or  at  least  a  tendency  towards 
conquering  ambition.  Carlyle,  with  the  austere  fanati- 
cism of  a  Puritan,  in  his  famous  letter  to  the  Times 
(November  II,  1870)  expressed  the  opinion  of  those  who 
considered  Paris  as  the  Modern  Babylon,  the  home  of 
vice  and  the  haunt  of  anarchy.  "They  believe  them- 
selves to  be  the  Christ  of  nations.  Let  them  ask  themselves 
whether  there  might  not  be  a  Cartouche  among  the 
nations.  .  .  .  Anarchical  France  is  receiving  her  first 
and  severe  lesson.  ..."  Bismarck,  the  saintly  hypocrite, 
had  cunningly  monopolized  the  principle  of  nationalities 
for  the  benefit  of  Germany.  German  science,  taking  ad- 
vantage of  its  prestige,  imposed  on  English  scholars  with 
the  theory  of  races,  in  whose  name  it  claimed  Alsace- 
Lorraine,  as  if  a  common  body  of  sentiment,  attachment 

4 


66  Movement  of  Nationalities 

to  the  same  laws  and  customs,  sympathy  in  ideas  and 
aspirations  did  not  constitute  stronger  bonds  than  lan- 
guage and  even  blood-ties. 

England,  however,  was  not  entirely  indifferent.  The 
philosopher,  John  Stuart  Mill,  pointed  out  to  his  country 
the  means  of  rendering  the  war  impossible,  namely,  bv 
declaring  her  determination  to  intervene  against  the  first 
of  the  two  adversaries  who  should  begin  hostilities. 
Under  the  weight  of  this  threat,  it  is  probable,  that  neither 
one  nor  the  other  would  have  dared  to  attack.  The 
sociologist  and  idealist  Frederic  Harrison  published  in 
December,  1870,  a  series  of  letters  in  the  Pall  Mall 
Gazette  which  showed  an  extraordinary  perspicacity  in 
the  interpretation  of  the  facts  actually  realized  today, 
and  in  the  anticipation  of  their  distant  effects.  The 
threatened  annexation  of  our  provinces  caused  him  to 
transfer  his  sympathies,  first  attached  to  Germany,  to 
the  side  of  France.  He  understood  that  this  spoliation 
was  an  outrage  against  the  rights  of  people  whose  just 
cause  could  be  redeemed  only  at  the  price  of  sanguinary 
conflict.  "Once  again  we  see  the  folly  of  the  Treaty  of 
Vienna,  of  the  pact  which  sold  nations  under  the  auction- 
eer's hammer,  like  a  herd  of  cattle!  ..."  And  in  what 
spirit  was  this  crime  perpetrated! 

The  Prussians  encourage  the  hatred  of  the  populations 
annexed.  It  is  sauce  to  the  joy  of  their  triumph.  .  .  .  The 
historical  and  ethnological  researches  of  their  professors  are 
only  a  sinister  joke  intended  for  those  whose  chains  they  rivet. 
They  seem  to  say  to  them  with  heavy  irony :  Patience,  broth- 
ers, it's  all  for  your  good,  we'll  give  you  back  a  mother- 
country.  .  .  .  This  cold  cruelty  [continues  Mr.  Harrison] 
confirms  and  explains  the  sanguinary  atrocities  which  had 
dishonoured  the  victories  of  Germany ;  it  reveals  a  deep-rooted 
and  shocking  mental  characteristic  of  this  people.  The  most 
insatiable  and  implacable  ambition  must  be  expected  of  them 


Movement  of  Nationalities  67 

in  the  future.  A  regime  of  force  at  home,  that  is  to  say,  des- 
potism; a  regime  of  force  abroad,  that  is  to  say,  conquering 
imperialism;  no  less  must  be  anticipated.1  Not  content  to 
put  a  formidable  army  on  foot,  Germany  will  want  to  construct 
a  powerful  fleet  and  will  aim  at  the  domination  of  the  world. 
What  will  become  in  that  case  of  England?  Here  we  are, 
alone  in  Europe.  Despite  our  jealousies  and  quarrels,  France 
and  ourselves  have  long  worked  together  for  the  good  of  the 
world.  Once  France  is  reduced  to  impotency,  England  will 
become  a  little  island  burdened  with  the  heavy  responsibili- 
ties of  immense  over-sea  possessions.  With  Prussia,  with 
Bismarck,  with  the  military  autocracy  and  a  semi-feudal 
aristocracy,  we  can  have  nothing  in  common.  .  .  .  We 
have  remained  still  while  our  ancient  and  natural  ally  was 
enduring  her  Austerlitz.  Let  us  hope  that  the  future  does 
not  reserve  a  Jena  for  us.2 

These  sentiments  with  regard  to  France  are  those 
which  all  England  experiences  today.  Thirty  years  of 
patient  effort  on  our  part  have  been  necessary,  thirty 
years  consecrated  to  the  definite  establishment  of  self- 
government,  to  the  sustained  development  of  our  indus- 
trial and  commercial  activity,  of  our  colonial  domain, 
and  of  our  military  power,  to  regain  the  esteem  and  con- 
fidence of  England.  Necessary,  too,  was  the  German 
peril  rising  suddenly  to  enlighten  the  English  as  to  their 
veritable  interests  and  real  sympathies.  A  preparation 
of  several  centuries  has  suddenly  produced  its  fruits. 

In  view  of  our  purpose  here,  what  is  important  to  retain 

1  Mr.  Frederic  Harrison,  at  the  age  of  eighty-four,  is  a  witness  today  of 
the  events  which  he  had  partly  foreseen  in  the  sombre  days  of  the  humilia- 
tion and  spoliation  of  France.  In  a  spirit  just  as  penetrating  and  with  a 
pen  just  as  alert  as  ever,  he  wrote,  in  1913,  a  "Warning"  which  announced 
what  was  bound  to  come  (English  Review,  January,  1913).  He  adjured 
England  to  be  mindful  of  preparedness,  not  for  the  conquest,  but  for  the 
peace  of  the  world. 

"See  in  Chap.  X.  the  eloquent  Ode  written  in  1870  by  the  poet  and 
novelist,  George  Meredith,  in  honour  of  France. 


68  Movement  of  Nationalities 

of  this  general  review  of  Anglo-French  relations  in  the 
nineteenth  century  is  the  fact  that,  despite  impetuous 
and  impatient  movements  or  moments  of  blindness  on 
either  side:  1st,  England  and  France  have  experienced 
several  periods  of  mutual  understanding  of  peace  and  of 
commercial  concord;  2d,  that  they  have  been  united  on 
several  occasions  in  thought  and  sentiment  for  generous 
causes  dominated  by  the  great  principles  of  the  inde- 
pendence and  the  liberty  of  nations;  3d,  that,  despite 
phases  of  coolness,  distrust,  or  rivalry,  nothing  of  an 
irreparable  nature  has  passed  between  them,  nothing 
which  excites  hatred  or  kills  reciprocal  esteem.  They 
have  progressed,  across  the  uncertainties  of  an  especially 
stormy  century,  by  different  roads,  towards  the  same 
ideal  of  liberty,  of  social  justice,  and  of  international 
justice,  that  is  to  say  towards  the  ideal  of  civilization. 
They  were  destined  to  meet  each  other  on  the  way  and 
unite:  today  their  alliance  rests  on  deep-laid  foundations. 
The  most  solid  unions  are  those  which  are  formed 
slowly,  through  the  gradual  development  of  affinities 
disclosed  little  by  little  which  reach  their  full  fruition 
over  the  most  serious  obstacles. 


CHAPTER  IV 

From   tHe    "  Splendid   Isolation "   to   tKe 
44  Entente  Cordiale."     (187O-19O4) 

EIGHTEEN  hundred  and  seventy  is  a  painful  date 
in  our  history;  but  it  is  also  a  memorable  one  for 
it  closes  an  era  of  agitation,  of  thoughtlessness,  and 
of  insufficiently  justified  confidence  in  ourselves.  From 
this  time  on,  a  new  period  discloses  itself,  a  period  of 
stability,  of  patient  effort  towards  reconstruction,  social, 
intellectual,  and  moral  progress,  and  of  repair  in  our 
military  forces — not  with  any  aggressive  purpose,  but 
with  the  object  of  guarding  against  all  danger  from  with- 
out and  of  some  day  being  able,  in  a  Europe  finally 
won  over  to  the  idea  of  justice,  to  rely,  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  right,  on  our  own  strength.  Since  1870  we 
have  been  a  pacific  people.  Our  colonial  enterprises, 
in  which  the  energy  of  the  race  and  its  talent  for 
administration  have  been  so  brilliantly  revealed,  have 
not  been  directed  against  any  Power  whatsoever.  In 
Europe  all  fair-minded  nations  have  recognized  the 
dignity  and  honesty  of  our  foreign  policy  which  has  not 
only  challenged  no  one,  but  has,  more  than  once,  been 
frankly  conciliatory.  We  have  been  one  of  the  first 
great  European  nations  to  set  an  example  of  moderation, 
of  respect  for  the  rights  of  others,  and  of  attachment  to 
peace;  in  other  words,  one  of  the  first  to  exhibit  that  new 
sense  of  international  morality,  upon  which  the  laws  of 
tomorrow  will  depend  for  their  observance. 

69 


70     From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale" 

England,  who  ranges  her  forces  with  ours  today  on 
the  same  ground  of  national  and  international  law,  has 
joined  us  in  this  cause  also.  By  temperament  she  is  less 
accessible  to  idealism  than  we  are.  For  many  years  she 
has  shown  very  little  enthusiasm  for  general  plans  which 
take  a  vast  and  rationalized  view  of  the  future;  she  has 
been  building  history  stone  by  stone,  guided  by  her  sense 
of  balance;  and  when,  at  times,  she  has  seemed  to  pause 
in  her  task,  it  has  been  to  contemplate  the  finished  parts 
of  the  structure  rather  than  those  which  pointed  to 
future  developments.  Rational  idealism  is  making  pro- 
gress in  England,  but  we  are  witnessing  today  the  first 
great  step  towards  its  positive  assertion  as  one  of  the 
incontestable  forces  of  national  action.  Over  the  practical 
and  literal  English  mind,  facts  have  always  had  more 
dominion  than  anything  else.  Now  the  fact  of  German 
rapacity  and  brutality,  which  so  cruelly  impressed  us, 
was  on  the  whole  without  effect  on  England  in  1870.  She 
distrusted  us;  she  believed  in  our  supposed  plans  of 
aggrandizement;  she  disapproved  of  the  levity  with 
which  we  had  seemed  to  provoke  the  conflict.  Hence 
she  believed  herself  justified  in  assuming  the  r61e  of  an 
impartial  spectator.  She  witnessed  catastrophes  like 
the  crushing  of  France  and  the  sudden  growth  of  Prus- 
sianized Germany  without  understanding  their  signifi- 
cance. Until  the  hour  when  the  reality  of  the  German 
peril  finally  became  obvious  to  her,  the  policy  of  England 
was  determined  by  traditional  attitudes,  traditional 
forces,  and  by  the  influence  of  an  acquired  momentum 
in  a  traditional  direction.  From  1870  to  1900,  she  re- 
mained what  she  had  been  in  the  course  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  subject  to  the  same  fluctuations,  and  inspired 
by  the  same  motives.  Let  us  recall  to  mind  what  these 
directing  influences  were. 

Taken  all  in  all,  English  collective  action,  in  the  nine- 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     71 

teenth  century,  was  dominated  by  national  instinct. 
Of  the  two  generators  of  action  among  nations  and  indi- 
viduals, intuition,  which  is  a  combination  of  sentiment 
and  prejudice,  takes  precedence  over  reason,  which  is  the 
product  of  reflection  and  of  convictions  that  are  based 
on  principles.  It  is  true  that  towards  1820  there  ap- 
peared an  English  school  of  reasoners,  the  utilitarian 
radicals,  theorists  of  the  industrial  and  commercial 
regime,  who  directed  their  efforts  towards  economic  liberty, 
free  contracts,  and  free  trade.  Their  influence  was  power- 
fully felt  in  the  regulation  of  the  productive  industries, 
of  relations  between  masters  and  workmen,  of  commercial 
legislation,  and  of  the  competitive  system.  This  school 
was  inclined  towards  peace.  With  the  exception  of 
a  few  commercial  treaties,  the  problems  of  foreign 
policy  almost  entirely  escaped  their  notice.  Palmerston, 
the  man  who  embodied  the  foreign  policy  of  the  time, 
was  a  Whig,  attached  to  the  strictly  insular  tradition  and 
to  ideas  equally  confined,  hostile  by  temperament  and 
education  to  rationalism,  loyal  to  the  national  idea,  and, 
though  giving  frequent  evidence  of  generous  sentiment, 
liberal  from  tradition  and  natural  nobleness  rather  than 
from  principle. 

The  England  of  the  nineteenth  century  embraces  in 
one  and  the  same  creed,  patriotism  and  the  love  of  liberty. 
The  two  sentiments  harmonize  with  and  mutually  fortify 
each  other  with  a  certain  emphasis  among  the  Tories  on 
the  necessity  of  maintaining  and  increasing  the  national 
forces,  and  with  a  strong  pride,  among  the  Liberals,  in 
national  liberty,  both  sides  being  ready,  however,  to  take 
action  as  occasion  demanded  in  the  support  of  national 
prestige  or  of  the  dictates  of  the  spirit  of  liberty.  In 
both  cases,  instinct  asserted  itself,  whether  it  was  the 
instinct  which  causes  a  vigorous  being  to  struggle  for 
broader  and  fuller  conditions  of  existence,  or  the  moral 


72     From  " Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale" 

instinct  which  determines  a  man  of  noble  spirit  and  of 
pride  in  his  past  to  safeguard  his  personality  and  to 
make  its  influence  felt  around  him.  This  national  instinct 
was  not  unlikely  to  be  defensive,  as  for  instance  when, 
on  several  occasions,  it  determined  popular  action  in 
favour  of  an  increase  in  armament.  It  could  also  be 
assertive,  as  for  example  when  it  aroused  an  ardent 
and  at  times  an  effective  sympathy  in  favour  of  nation- 
alities, and  once  in  1853,  when  it  evoked  vigour  and  de- 
cision sufficient  to  force  England  to  take  up  arms  against 
Russia  in  the  name  of  the  threatened  balance  of  power 
in  Europe  and  of  imperilled  liberty.  Finally,  we  shall 
see  that  it  could  become  expansive  and  imperialistic,  as 
in  1876,  when  it  was  directed  once  more  against  Russia 
on  the  score  of  the  Eastern  question,  and  on  several 
occasions,  from  1876  to  1902,  when  in  colonial  questions 
it  was  frequently  opposed  to  the  progress  of  French 
expansion. 

During  the  first  part  of  this  period,  the  prejudices  of 
the  past,  coupled  with  fresh  alarms  often  exaggerated, 
kept  this  misunderstanding  with  France  thoroughly 
alive,  and  favoured  by  a  sort  of  inevitable  reaction  the 
benevolent  illusions  with  regard  to  Germany.  But 
during  the  whole  period  we  have  the  revelation  of  a  new 
Germany,  whose  menace  is  destined  to  shift  the  centre 
of  gravity  of  British  interests,  and  create  new  sympathies 
in  England,  favourable  to  France  and  favourable  to  the 
growth  in  English  thought  of  the  latent  forces  of  rational 
idealism. 

It  is  at  this  vital  moment  that  the  work  of  secular 
preparation,  the  effect  of  which  has  been  hindered  by 
prejudices  and  a  false  statement  of  the  problems  to  be 
solved,  bears  its  full  fruition,  through  a  reaction  against 
the  moral  and  historical  scandal  of  militarism,  of  German 
militarism  and  Machiavellism.  England  and  France  dis- 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     73 

cover  each  other,  recognize  their  respective  virtues  and 
common  generosity  and  unite  for  the  deliverance  of 
Europe  by  peaceful  means  as  long  as  these  are  possible, 
but  by  war  when  war  becomes  an  inevitable  necessity. 

After  1870,  as  before,  England  at  first  remained  faith- 
ful to  the  policy  which,  with  few  exceptions,  had  been 
the  constant  rule  for  her  exterior  relations,  namely  more 
or  less  direct  co-operation  with  the  States  of  Central 
Europe  against  France  and  Russia.  Germany,  although 
unified  and  enjoying  the  prestige  of  victory,  still  contin- 
ued, under  the  skilful  direction  of  Bismarck,  to  be  moder- 
ate or  at  least  dissimulating  in  her  ambitions  as  a  proud 
and  acquisitive  nation.  To  all  outward  appearance, 
she  was  aiming  at  nothing  beyond  continental  supre- 
macy, an  aim  which  was  not  displeasing  to  England. 
Austria,  definitely  frustrated  in  her  imperialistic  claims, 
was  exhausting  herself  in  maintaining  the  cohesion  of 
the  heterogeneous  peoples  united  by  force  under  the 
sceptre  of  the  Hapsburgs;  her  weakness  deprived  her 
of  any  chance  of  doing  harm;  even  her  desire  for  expan- 
sion in  the  Balkans  served  English  plans,  in  opposing 
as  it  did  the  Slavic  pressure.  France,  despite  her  re- 
verses, continued  to  be  the  distrusted  neighbour.  She 
stood  at  the  gates  of  the  Channel,  she  was  a  great  sea 
power,  and,  since  the  consolidation  of  her  Algerian 
possessions,  she  was  a  great  Mediterranean  Power  as 
well.  Russia  was  the  suspected  neighbour  at  the  fron- 
tiers of  India,  disturbing  on  account  of  the  incessant 
growth  of  her  population,  her  uninterrupted  penetration 
of  Asia,  and  her  desire  to  open  a  way  into  the  Mediter- 
ranean. Consequently,  there  was  a  tendency  on  the 
part  of  England,  without  abandoning  her  insular  reserve, 
to  favour  the  policy  of  Germany  and  Austria  and  to 
check  the  policy  of  France  and  Russia. 


74     From  "Isolation"  to  ''Entente  Cordiale" 

France,  alone  in  Europe,  devoted  herself  at  first,  with 
a  perseverance  and  tenacity  which  astonished  the  world, 
to  the  reparation  of  her  losses,  to  the  strengthening  of 
her  productive  forces  and  the  reorganization  of  her  army. 
In  1874,  Bismarck,  uneasy  at  our  rapid  recovery  in  vitality 
and  power,  made  no  secret  of  his  intention  to  crush  us 
once  more,  and  this  time  we  were  to  be  left  no  hope  of 
regeneration.  England  joined  with  Russia  to  prevent 
this  iniquity.  But  her  intervention  did  not  augur  a 
policy  of  permanent  goodwill  towards  us.  We  contin- 
ued to  be  her  hereditary  enemy;  we  were  soon  destined 
to  become  her  colonial  rival  and  a  rival  which  must  be 
prevented  from  acquiring  power  at  her  expense. 

For  a  time,  however,  England's  attention  was  ab- 
sorbed by  the  threat  of  a  Russian  advance  in  the  Balkans. 
The  Liberals  were  out  of  office.  The  man  who  had 
assumed  leadership  of  the  conservative  party  was  the 
famous  writer  and  orator  Disraeli,  leader  of  society  and 
favourite  of  the  people,  for  he  had  succeeded  in  winning  the 
esteem  of  the  aristocracy  -by  the  elegance  of  his  manners 
and  the  attachment  of  the  people  by  his  social  reforms. 
The  Queen  was  soon  to  recompense  his  services  and  talents 
with  the  title  of  Lord  Beaconsfield.  His  home  policy 
had  served  the  purpose  of  assuring  him  a  successful  career; 
but  his  real  passion  was  for  foreign  affairs.  He  repre- 
sented national  pride,  without  the  dash  of  generous 
liberalism  which  Palmerston  had  introduced  into  it,  and 
with  an  aggressive  acumen  which  the  Gladstone  Cabinet, 
during  its  six  years  of  power,  had  succeeded  in  lessening. 
The  foreign  policy  of  Palmerston  had  extended  help  to 
oppressed  nationalities  in  a  somewhat  haphazard  fashion 
and  had  shown  itself  to  be  meddle-muddling,  that  of 
Disraeli  was  "spirited"  in  the  full  sense  of  the  word. 

Certain  well-known  events  furnished  Disraeli  with 
the  opportunity  of  showing  the  vigour  of  his  policy.  A 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     75 

series  of  horrible  massacres  of  Christians  had  stained 
Bosnia  and  Bulgaria  with  blood.  In  reply  to  some  tribal 
uprisings,  the  Sublime  Porte  had  delivered  a  number  of 
innocent  village  people  to  the  cruelty  of  bands  of  cut- 
throats who  had  done  their  work  with  the  zeal  and  ex- 
quisite barbarity  for  which  Turkish  domination  has 
acquired  a  sinister  notoriety.  Austria  had  drawn  up  a 
Note  in  accord  with  Russia  and  the  other  Powers,  to 
protest  against  the  barbarism  of  the  massacres  and  to 
exact  reforms  likely  to  alleviate  the  condition  of  the 
Christian  population.  If  the  Porte  refused  or  procras- 
tinated in  its  usual  manner  it  was  inevitable  war. 
Russia  made  no  secret  of  being  ready  to  act.  Disraeli, 
in  the  name  of  England,  refused  to  sign  the  Memorandum. 
He  seemed  to  see  in  it  a  renewal  of  the  danger  to  meet 
which  the  Crimean  War  had  been  undertaken:  England 
could  not  allow  Russia  to  use  disturbances  in  the  Balkans 
as  a  pretext  to  enter  Constantinople,  get  a  footing  in  the 
Mediterranean,  and  become,  more  than  ever,  a  menace 
to  India.  In  the  eyes  of  the  Prime  Minister,  the  Empire, 
over  which  England  extended  her  power  far  and  wide, 
ought  to  hold  the  first  place  in  the  solicitude  of  the 
country.  All  considerations — even  those  which  appeared 
of  capital  importance  to  minds  less  blinded  by  militant 
realism — ought  to  give  way  before  the  great  design  of  ex- 
pansion. England,  consequently,  declared  herself  protec- 
tress of  Turkey. 

This  attitude  aroused  the  indignation  of  the  Liberal 
opposition.  The  great  Radical,  John  Bright,  scarcely 
exaggerated  when  he  spoke  of  the  "rise  in  mass  of  the 
popular  elements."  Gladstone  went  everywhere,  har- 
angued excited  crowds  in  monster  meetings,  and  de- 
nounced the  infamy  of  the  Porte  in  a  pamphlet  which 
sold  at  the  rate  of  ten  thousand  copies  a  day.  The 
historian  Freeman  pronounced  the  famous  sentence: 


76     From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale" 

"Let  India  perish  rather  than  Justice  ..."  which  nearly 
cost  him  the  loss  of  the  chair  of  Modern  History  at 
Oxford. 

The  yeast  of  Liberal  enthusiasm  was  thus  fermenting 
and  active  in  the  nation.  The  Russian  victory  of  1878, 
however,  determined  a  reaction  in  favour  of  the  instinct 
of  conservation,  and,  soon  afterwards,  of  the  instinct 
of  self-assertion.  The  moment  was  not  ripe  for  the 
possible  victory  of  moral  idealism  over  a  particular  kind 
of  suspicious  and  imperious  patriotism.  The  ancient 
ambitions  of  Russia  were  on  record  to  justify  certain 
fears  regarding  her  new  enterprise.  English  opinion 
allowed  itself  to  be  swayed  by  one  of  those  oscillations 
which  operate  in  free  countries:  after  the  weakening  of 
the  foreign  policy  under  the  Liberal  Government,  a 
large  proportion  of  the  English  people  had  reached  the 
point  of  desiring  the  affirmation  of  the  national  power. 
A  strong  current  of  warlike  aspirations  was  discernible. 
Thus  under  the  influence  of  causes  both  of  a  domestic 
and  foreign  order,  England  entered  a  phase  of  imperialism 
which  was  to  last  twenty-five  years. 

After  having  constructed  a  barrier  in  the  Congress  of 
Berlin  against  the  "Russian  spectre,"  Disraeli  prepared 
an  era  of  conquering  expansion  in  Africa  and  Asia.  The 
Liberals  who  succeeded  him,  falling  heirs,  despite  them- 
selves, to  a  situation  in  which  the  honour  and  the  interests 
of  the  nation  were  pledged,  were  obliged  to  sustain  and 
even  to  encourage  at  times  the  progress  of  English  arms. 
Then  the  leader  of  a  new  fraction  of  the  Conservative 
party,  the  Imperialist  Joseph  Chamberlain,  full  of  youth- 
ful ardour  and  strong  hope  for  the  future  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  race,  assumed  the  direction  of  colonial  affairs  and 
pushed  matters  forward  at  a  rapid  but  imprudent  pace 
which  was  destined  to  bring  about  the  painful  complica- 
tions of  the  Transvaal  War.  After  that  a  movement  of 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     77 

reaction  was  to  bring  the  country  to  a  policy  of  prudence 
and  patience,  to  moral  and  social  idealism  and  peace. 

During  this  period,  France,  after  having  repaired 
her  disasters,  developed  her  colonial  policy  with  firmness 
and  method.  She  clashed,  at  times  sharply  enough, 
with  England  who  was  ready  to  consider  any  settlement 
of  a  great  Power  in  regions  adjoining  her  possessions  as 
an  attack  either  on  her  acquired  rights  or  on  those  about 
to  be  acquired.  Germany,  on  the  other  hand,  restrained 
by  Bismarck,  in  a  spirit  of  relative  prudence,  did  not  seem 
to  be,  at  first,  a  dangerous  rival.  The  old  Chancellor, 
as  long  as  he  was  in  power,  skilfully  fostered  English 
sympathies  and  cloaked  by  a  series  of  diplomatic  triumphs 
in  the  maniere  douce  the  first  steps  in  German  colonial 
expansion.  With  the  accession  of  William  II,  however, 
the  course  of  events  changed  rapidly.  Just  how  the 
antagonism  of  England  and  Germany  gradually  revealed 
itself  and  why  it  ended  finally  in  effecting  a  change  in 
the  sentiments  and  policy  of  our  neighbour  across  the 
Straits,  is  the  question  with  which  we  are  chiefly  concerned 
at  present. 

The  great  transformation,  one  might  say  revolution, 
which  has  been  accomplished  in  the  relations  of  one  state 
to  another  through  the  progress  of  science  and  its  appli- 
cation to  the  means  of  communication,  consists  in  the 
expansion  of  their  ambition  beyond  continental  frontiers 
and  the  multiplication  of  their  points  of  contact  in  all 
latitudes  or  all  waters.  When  Germany  entered  the  com- 
petition for  colonial  possessions,  she  found  England, 
Russia,  and  France  already  engaged  in  a  course  of  action 
to  which  she  was  able  to  contribute  nothing  but  a  name, 
Weltpolitik,  world  policy.  The  Eastern  question  was  to 
become  the  prelude  to  the  Far-Eastern  question:  the 
4 'sick man's"  empire  was  to  prove  not  only  the  key  of  the 


78     From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale" 

Mediterranean  but  also  the  gate  of  the  Indian  Ocean  and 
the  Pacific. 

The  direct  cause  of  the  revolution  was  the  piercing  of 
the  Suez  Canal,  the  daring  conception  of  a  French  brain. 
Palmerston  had  ridiculed  what  he  considered  a  presump- 
tuous folly.  But  when  the  impossible  had  become  a 
reality,  England  held  herself  ready  to  derive  benefit  from 
it.  In  1875,  Disraeli,  noticing  that  the  Khedive  was  in 
financial  difficulties,  redeemed  the  176,000  shares  of  the 
Canal  originally  allotted  to  the  Egyptian  Government. 
Fresh  financial  troubles,  followed  by  a  massacre  of  the 
European  Colony  of  Alexandria,  induced  Gladstone,  in 
1 88 1,  to  take  a  decisive  step  towards  the  occupation  of 
Egypt.  Gladstone  acted  most  reluctantly  in  the  matter. 
He  had  offered  a  share  in  the  enterprise  to  France  and 
then  to  Italy,  who  had  both  refused.  England  had  thus 
embarked  on  the  enterprise  alone,  and  was  on  the  point 
of  finding  herself,  by  the  obligations  incident  to  her 
responsible  position,  involved  in  the  conquest  of  the 
Upper-Nile  and  the  Soudan,  an  arduous  task  to  which 
Gladstone  devoted  himself  without  enthusiasm.  His 
hesitations  cost  England  the  disaster  of  Khartoum  and 
the  death  of  Gordon. 

These  disasters  only  strengthened  English  determina- 
tion. The  Conservatives,  reseated  in  power,  gave  a  new 
and  vigorous  impulse  to  British  imperialism.  In  every 
continent,  English  possessions  were  consolidated  and 
extended.  The  Queen  had  already,  in  1877,  been  pro- 
claimed Empress  of  India,  a  new  title  symbolizing  the 
power  of  England  in  Asia.  India  was  protected  against 
Russia,  on  the  west,  by  the  establishment  of  an  English 
protectorate  in  Afghanistan  (1879)  and  against  France 
on  the  east  by  the  annexation  of  Burmah.  A  revolt  of 
the  Zulus  gave  England  the  opportunity  of  establishing 
her  suzerainty  in  the  Transvaal,  until  the  time  when, 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     79 

through  pacific  means,  it  was  hoped,  a  more  intimate 
union  of  the  South  African  colonies  might  be  brought 
about.  In  Central,  Eastern,  and  Western  Africa  voyages 
of  exploration,  expeditions,  raids,  formal  occupations 
broadened  English  territories  everywhere  or  brought  about 
the  founding  of  new  establishments.  In  China,  every 
opportunity  was  turned  to  account  with  a  view  to  pushing 
the  advantages  obtained  in  former  wars,  to  obtaining  the 
cession  of  ports  with  their  hinterland,  and  to  preparing 
the  way  for  commercial  penetration  by  railroads  and 
navigable  waterways.  When  it  became  evident  that 
Russia  was  extending  her  plans  as  far  as  the  Middle 
Empire,  and  that,  while  temporarily  abandoning  the 
partition  of  Turkey,  she  was  contemplating  the  dismem- 
berment of  China,  England  approached  the  Power  whose 
rapid  progress  in  industry,  armaments,  and  liberal  insti- 
tutions was  every  day  making  her  more  formidable  in 
the  Far  East:  in  1900-1902  she  formed  a  defensive  alliance 
with  Japan. 

During  the  last  twenty  years  of  the  nineteenth  century 
Russia  and  France,  then,  were  the  objects  of  English 
jealousy.  London  struggled  foot  by  foot  with  us  in 
every  quarter  where  our  arms  progressed  and  where  our 
administration  consolidated  our  conquests.  At  the  Con- 
gress of  Berlin,  Bismarck  and  Lord  Salisbury  had  seemed 
to  give  their  tacit  consent  to  our  plan  of  pacifying  Tunis. 
When,  three  years  later,  relying  on  this  encouragement, 
we  established  ourselves  at  Tunis,  the  English  Prime 
Minister,  in  accord  with  Italy,  raised  certain  difficulties. 
In  Egypt,  despite  the  mistake  made  by  our  government 
in  refusing  to  co-operate  in  the  bombardment  of  Alexan- 
dria, we  had  financial  interests  and  moral  rights  which 
England  sought  to  hold  in  check.  She  always  replied 
evasively  to  our  notes  reminding  her  of  her  promise  to 
evacuate  the  country.  Finally,  the  rivalry  for  the  pos- 


8o     From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale" 

session  of  the  Egyptian  Soudan  well-nigh  brought  on  war 
at  the  time  of  the  Fashoda  incident  in  1898.  In  New- 
foundland the  fisheries  dispute,  full  two  centuries  old, 
seemed  without  solution.  Fresh  fields  of  conflict  opened 
in  Madagascar,  in  the  New  Hebrides,  in  Senegal,  in  Daho- 
mey, in  the  Congo,  in  Siam,  in  Morocco.  We  found 
England  sometimes  contesting  rights  which  we  considered 
as  thoroughly  established,  sometimes  appearing  at  bound- 
aries which  we  believed  to  be  ours,  at  others  combating 
our  influence  with  princes  or  heads  of  tribes,  and  at 
others  favouring  the  war  contraband  traffic  to  our  detri- 
ment. It  was  only  by  virtue  of  sheer  tenacity  and 
energy  that  our  statesmen  established  the  colonial  empire 
of  France  in  spite  of  the  obstacles  set  up  at  every  turn 
in  our  road, — until  the  day  when  an  altered  aspect  in  Eu- 
ropean affairs  opened  the  eyes  of  England  and  prepared 
the  great  turning-point  destined  to  be  called  the  Entente 
Cordiale. 

During  the  whole  period  through  which  the  Anglo- 
French  and  Anglo-Russian  unfriendliness  lasted,  England 
kept  up  pleasant  relations  with  Berlin,  and,  on  several 
occasions,  concluded  arrangements  which  seemed  more 
especially  favourable  to  the  Wilhelmstrasse.  Although 
Bismarck  had  declared  that  Germany  had  no  colonial 
aims  and  that  her  sole  programme  was  to  complete  her 
unity  and  assure  her  position  in  Europe,  nevertheless, 
the  prosperity  and  the  growing  ambitions  of  the  nation 
led  her,  towards  1880,  to  place  herself  in  line  for  partici- 
pation in  the  partition  of  Africa.  Merchants  of  Bremen 
and  Hamburg  had  established  factories  in  Central  West- 
Africa,  near  the  Gold  Coast  and  British  Nigeria,  in  the 
south-west  near  Cape  Colony,  and  on  the  east  coast 
opposite  the  island  of  Zanzibar.  They  urged  the  Chan- 
cellor to  assert  the  rights  of  Germans  over  these  regions 


From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale"     81 

and  thus  to  lay  the  foundation  of  a  growing  colonial 
domain.  Societies  were  formed;  books,  pamphlets,  and 
press  articles  spread  the  idea  among  the  public;  in  short 
one  of  those  initial  movements  of  Germanic  power  which 
was  to  be  frequently  renewed  in  the  days  to  come.  Bis- 
marck allowed  himself  to  be  carried  away  by  the  current, 
fell  in  with  the  views  of  the  colonial  party,  and  adopted 
measures  destined  to  realize  its  fondest  desires. 

Two  English  expeditions  had  permitted  themselves  to 
be  forestalled,  in  the  hinterland  of  the  Togo  and  the 
Cameroun  by  the  explorer  Nachtigal.  England  acknow- 
ledged the  principle  of  precedence  and,  in  1885  and  1886, 
accepted  the  accomplished  fact.  She  manifested  the 
same  spirit  of  conciliation  with  regard  to  the  other  points 
of  the  African  coast  where,  otherwise,  there  might  have 
arisen  serious  ground  for  contestation.  It  is  true  that 
as  soon  as  England  suspected  the  designs  of  Berlin  in 
Damaraland,  in  South-West  Africa,  she  occupied  Walfish 
Bay,  the  only  natural  port  of  the  region.  But  in  spite 
of  this,  Germany  continued  to  progress  and  stretched  her 
possessions  as  far  as  the  Orange  River,  without  England's 
raising  any  serious  obstacle.  At  times  things  got  to  a 
dangerous  pass;  but  all  conflict  was  avoided.  After 
President  Kruger's  visit  to  Europe  in  1884,  a  project  was 
elaborated  between  Germany  and  the  Transvaal,  for  the 
purpose  of  uniting  the  Boer  country  to  the  German  South- 
West  Africa  by  a  transcontinental  railway  across  Bechu- 
analand:  Gladstone  had  Bechuanaland  occupied  by  the 
Cape  Colony  troops,  and  the  railroad  had  to  be  abandoned. 
In  Egyptian  Soudan,  where  the  revolt  of  the  Mahdi  had 
placed  English  domination  in  danger  for  a  time,  a  German 
adventurer,  known  under  the  name  of  Emin  Effendi, 
defeated  a  horde  of  Mahdists  and  installed  himself  as 
master  in  Equatoria.  England  interposed:  four  years 
later,  in  1889,  Stanley  reached  Equatoria  and  intimated 


82     From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale" 

to  Emin  to  quit  the  country.  Another  German  adven- 
turer, Doctor  Peters,  had  set  himself  up  in  Ouganda,  at 
the  source  of  the  Nile:  as  before,  England  would  not  toler- 
ate his  remaining  there.  These  colonial  difficulties  did  not 
alter  the  excellent  relations  between  London  and  Berlin; 
the  treaty  of  1890  settled  the  African  troubles  amicably. 

With  England  [said  Bismarck]  we  are  living  on  good  terms ; 
that  England,  with  her  assurance  of  supremacy  on  the  seas, 
should  feel  some  surprise  at  the  sight  of  her  land-rats  of 
cousins  putting  to  sea,  is  not  astonishing;  but  we  have  enduring 
ties  of  friendship  with  England  and  the  two  countries  are 
anxious  to  conserve  them.  (Speech  made  January  10,  1885.) 

The  colonial  rivalries  of  England  and  Germany  had 
been  easily  smoothed  over  because  the  two  nations  were 
on  good  terms  in  Europe.  After  the  Congress  of  Berlin, 
Bismarck,  foreseeing  that  the  deception  of  Russia  might 
some  day  draw  her  closer  to  France,  concluded  in  1879, 
the  Double  Alliance  with  Austria.  The  entry  of  Italy 
into  the  combination  in  1882  gave  rise  to  the  Triple 
Alliance  which  was  to  bear  with  so  great  a  weight  on  the 
destinies  of  Europe.  From  the  first,  England  looked  upon 
the  Triplice  with  a  favourable  eye.  France,  kept  on  the 
alert  on  the  frontier  of  the  Vosges,  would  not  be  able  to 
throw  herself  seriously  into  her  colonial  enterprises; 
Italy,  on  the  other  hand,  sustained  by  her  two  powerful 
allies,  would  maintain  the  status  quo  in  the  Mediterranean. 
England  saw  in  the  new  concentration  of  the  kingdoms 
of  Central  Europe  certain  advantages  for  herself:  she 
foresaw  on  their  part  no  difficulty.  She  felt  herself 
strong  and  rich  and  in  the  fulness  of  her  growth;  the 
goodwill  which  she  hoped  to  inspire  in  the  Triple  Alliance, 
in  exchange  for  her  sympathy,  was  a  guarantee  against 
the  European  ambitions  of  the  secular  rivals,  Russia  and 
France,  just  as  the  power  of  her  immense  empire  secured 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     83 

her  against  their  ambitions  outside  of  Europe.  She  had 
no  idea  of  joining  the  Triplice,  because  she  meant  to  keep 
a  free  hand  in  order  to  conserve  her  advantageous  position 
of  arbiter  mundi  and  because,  having  no  designs  on  the 
continent,  she  had  no  need  of  anybody's  direct  assistance. 
Friendship  served  her  interests  better  than  alliance. 
The  natural  affinity  which  seemed  to  establish  a  moral 
union  between  peoples  of  Germanic  origin  was  sufficient, 
she  thought,  to  assure  their  co-operation.  The  conclu- 
sion of  the  Franco-Russian  alliance  in  1891  only  had  the 
effect  of  confirming  her  in  her  sympathies  for  the  Central 
Powers. 

The  Near  East  was  the  theatre  where  the  rivalry  of 
influences  of  the  two  European  groups  came  into  col- 
lision. The  Armenian  massacres  in  1894-96  rendered 
European  intervention  inevitable.  London  and  Vienna 
believed  the  moment  favourable  for  carrying  into  effect 
the  dismemberment  of  Turkey.  By  a  curious  reversal 
of  positions,  it  was  Russia  who  supported  the  dogma  of 
the  intangibility  of  the  Sultan's  possessions.  A  plan  of 
reforms  under  the  Powers'  guarantee  was  finally  settled 
upon.  Germany,  who  had  stood  aside  from  the  conflict, 
won  the  secret  sympathies  of  Turkey,  without  awakening 
the  suspicions  of  England.  Germany  thus  profited,  against 
England  herself,  from  the  goodwill  of  Downing  Street. 
The  moment  was  not  yet  come  for  the  disclosure  of  this 
double-dealing. 

In  exchange  for  the  liberty  which  the  Germans  left  the 
English  in  Egypt,  the  latter  undertook  to  encourage  them 
at  our  expense  in  Morocco.  A  soldier  of  fortune  and  an 
English  journalist,  MacLean  and  Harris,  had  enlisted 
the  confidence  of  the  Sultan  of  Fez.  While  prejudicing 
him  against  us,  they  pictured  Germany  to  him  in  the 
light  of  a  friend.  Thanks  to  them  the  so-called  scientific 
expeditions  of  Doctor  Fischer  were  successfully  carried 


84     From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale" 

out  and  El  Mokri  was  received  in  audience  at  Berlin 
(1888).  In  China,  England,  who  was  jealous  enough  of 
Russia's  progress,  accepted  without  protest  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  German  military  and  naval  station  at  Kiao- 
Chau  (1897).  Yet  that  event  was  a  fact  of  capital 
importance,  a  first  decisive  sign  of  Germany's  new  line  of 
direction,  since  the  disgrace  of  Bismarck  and  loud  declara- 
tions of  William  II.  It  was  the  first  affirmation  of  the 
Weltpolitik.  Neither  before  nor  after  Kiao-Chau, 
however,  was  there  any  difficulty  between  the  two  govern- 
ments: for  England,  the  enemy  was  not  Germany,  but 
Russia.  It  was  against  Russia,  three  years  later,  that  the 
Anglo-German  agreement  of  1900  concerning  China  was 
signed.  Germany  guaranteed  the  integrity  of  China 
threatened  by  the  Russian  pressure  in  Manchuria; 
England  in  return  gave  her  consent  to  an  expansion  of 
German  trading  establishments  and  to  the  acquisition 
of  navigation  monopolies.  Following  this  agreement, 
William  II  pronounced  the  Elberfeld  speech  in  which 
he  declared:  "This  understanding  with  the  greatest  of 
Germanic  states  outside  of  Germany  will  be  in  the  future 
a  powerful  adjuvant  for  the  common  efforts  of  the  two 
peoples  on  the  world's  market,  where  they  will  be  able 
to  carry  on  friendly  competition  without  any  hostile 
shock." 

The  year  1900  marks  the  climax  of  Anglo-German 
friendship.  The  relations  of  the  two  countries  were  so 
cordial  that  a  few  months  before  the  Emperor's  speech, 
Mr.  Chamberlain  had  believed  he  could  unbosom  him- 
self in  public  concerning  a  great  project  cherished  by  him 
and  his  friend  Cecil  Rhodes,  the  gold  and  diamond  king 
of  South  Africa.  The  two  leaders  of  imperialism  professed 
faith  in  the  qualities  of  energy  of  the  Anglo-Saxons,  who 
proved  themselves  thereby  worthy  scions  of  the  Germanic 
stock,  of  the  master  and  ruling  race,  destined  to  govern 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     85 

the  world.  In  a  speech  which  he  delivered  at  Leicester, 
November  30,  1899,  Mr.  Chamberlain  spoke  of  the  ne- 
cessity of  an  alliance  between  England,  Germany,  and 
the  United  States,  for  the  purpose  of  securing  the  peace 
of  the  world.  This  fond  dream,  it  is  true,  aroused  grave 
objections  in  all  three  countries. 

We  have  now  come  to  the  beginning  of  the  Transvaal 
War.  German  opinion  had  suddenly  become  hostile 
to  England.  British  aggression  against  a  small  people, 
itself  a  member  of  the  Teutonic  family,  to  whom  the 
Kaiser,  in  a  well-known  telegram  had  formerly  promised 
protection,  and  with  whom  Bismarck  had  treated  in  the 
unfortunate  trans-African  railroad  affair,  had  suddenly 
caused  the  Germans  to  forget  their  racial  affinities  with 
their  Saxon  cousins  and  awakened  them  to  the  sense  of 
an  opposition  of  interests  and  ambitions  that  was  daily 
growing  more  precise.  German  press  commentaries  were 
harsh.  English  opinion,  stung  to  the  quick,  could  not 
pardon  them.  Hostility  on  the  part  of  the  French  was 
to  be  expected,  the  hostility  of  the  Germans  could  not 
be  supported  without  resentment.  Was  it  the  place  of 
the  Germans,  whose  war  methods  in  1870  had  so  often 
been  atrocious,  to  manifest  indignation?  And  was  this 
the  fruit  of  English  perseverance  and  complacency  during 
the  last  thirty  years?  .  .  .  Under  these  circumstances  not 
only  was  the  Chamberlain  project  doomed  to  failure  but 
Anglo-German  relations  became  embittered ! 

It  is  about  this  date  of  1900  that  English  policy  veered 
sharply,  changing  the  direction  of  its  sympathies  and 
friendships  and  transforming  the  conditions  of  the  bal- 
ance of  power  in  Europe.  For  this  decided  change 
there  were  certain  important,  active  causes.  I  have  just 
mentioned  the  imprudent  acrimony  of  the  German 
press.  The  Transvaal  War  had  still  other  effects  on  the 


86     From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale" 

disposition  of  the  national  character.  It  revealed  traces 
of  weakness  in  the  effective  power  of  England,  and  gave 
birth  to  a  lack  of  confidence  in  a  people  which  had  some- 
times transgressed  through  over-assurance,  but  whose 
rectitude  of  judgment  and  practical  sense  rendered  them 
prompt  to  appreciate  the  evidence  in  the  case.  About 
this  time,  Queen  Victoria,  grandmother  of  William  II 
and  strongly  attached  to  German  friendship,  died.  She 
was  succeeded  on  the  throne  by  King  Edward  VII,  a 
friend  of  France,  and  determined  from  the  earliest  years 
of  his  reign  to  restore  the  splendour  of  the  Crown  by 
playing  the  part  in  foreign  affairs  which  the  Constitution 
conceded  him.  Finally,  in  France,  the  danger  of  Fashoda 
had  brought  about  a  change  in  the  direction  of  the  foreign 
policy  which  was  becoming  favourable  to  a  reconciliation 
with  England.  These  active  causes  precipitated  events: 
but  these  events  had  been  prepared  long  ago  by  certain 
deep-seated  causes. 

The  economic  rivalry,  born  between  England  and 
Germany  on  the  day  when  the  latter,  unified,  exalted  by 
victory  and  stimulated  by  a  new  desire  for  enjoyment 
and  riches,  had  embarked  in  the  venture  of  industrial  and 
commercial  development  .  .  .  this  rivalry  increased 
and  became  acute  when  this  development  assumed  colos- 
sal proportions,  when  all  the  forces  and  resources  of  the 
State  were  used  in  its  services,  and  when  the  avowed  goal 
was  to  attain  the  first  rank  among  the  producing  and 
exporting  nations.  In  1884,  Gladstone,  speaking  before 
the  Birkenhead  electors,  was  thinking  of  Germany;  he 
intimated  that  there  was  no  reason  for  fearing  her:  "I 
have  seen,"  said  he,  "the  force,  riches,  and  power  of  our 
country  increased  beyond  all  expectation,  almost  beyond 
all  imagination.  ...  If  the  power  of  other  European 
countries  has  increased,  the  growth  of  English  power 
has  been  still  greater."  Notwithstanding,  as  early  as 


From  " Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     87 

1885  a  parliamentary  committee  was  constituted  with  a 
view  to  tracing  the  causes  of  a  certain  diminution  of  the 
British  lead  in  commercial  and  industrial  affairs,  revealed 
by  statistics.  This  committee,  through  the  voice  of 
competent  economists,  expressed  the  first  fears  conceived 
in  England  with  regard  to  the  growing  rival  of  the  East : 
"The  competition  of  Germany  is  becoming  more  and 
more  severe.  .  .  .  The  Germans  are  gaining  ground  on 
us,  thanks  to  their  superior  knowledge  of  the  markets, 
thanks  to  their  desire  to  suit  the  taste  of  each  customer, 
and  their  determination  to  set  foot  everywhere." 

Statistics  allowed  this  progress  to  be  measured.  Ger- 
many had  become  a  great  producer  of  coal.  In  1870, 
in  the  basin  of  the  Ruhr,  20,000,000  tons  of  coal  were 
extracted;  in  1900,  201,000,000  tons.  Germany  had 
become  a  great  industrial  nation.  In  1870,  the  metal- 
lurgic  foundries  employed  170,000  workmen;  in  1900, 
800,000.  Besides  metallurgy,  the  weaving  industries  were 
developing.  The  chemical  industry  was  becoming  the 
first  in  the  world. 

Commerce  was  following  the  industrial  development 
at  the  same  rate;  an  immense  network  of  railroads  inter- 
sected the  country  and  numerous  maritime  lines,  sub- 
sidized by  the  State,  put  Germany  in  communication 
with  the  entire  globe.  In  ten  years,  from  1890  to  1900, 
the  exports  had  increased  1,200,000,000  marks.  Certain 
ports,  like  Hamburg,  had  grown  to  astonishing  proportions; 
the  tonnage  of  ships  entering  and  clearing  from  this  port 
in  1900,  was  76,000,000  tons  against  10,000,000,  in  1890. 
During  the  same  period,  English  exports  had  remained 
stationary  or  had  decreased. 

England  could  scarcely  ignore  such  symptoms.  In 
1897  a  pamphlet  introduced  the  famous  phrase  Made  in 
Germany,  which  struck  the  popular  imagination  and 
went  from  mouth  to  mouth,  but  remained  a  formula  for 


88     From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale" 

banter  instead  of  becoming  a  watchword  or  a  battle- 
cry.  The  label  required  in  Great  Britain  on  objects 
imported  from  Germany,  did  not  lower  by  a  shilling  the 
sum-total  of  German  imports:  the  German  commercial 
traveller,  insinuating,  jovial,  admirably  versed  in  the 
English  tongue,  triumphed  in  the  British  market  as  in 
other  markets  and  sold  German  cutlery  even  in  Sheffield. 
The  reports  of  the  English  consular  agents  drew  atten- 
tion to  the  peril  and  enumerated  the  causes  of  economic 
prosperity  on  the  other  side  of  the  Rhine:  superior  or- 
ganization, training  of  workmen  and  employees  for  their 
task  by  means  of  excellent  technical  schools,  instruction 
in  languages  and  sending  of  experienced  representatives 
to  all  countries,  ease  in  adapting  themselves  to  foreign 
taste,  concentration  of  production  in  immense  manu- 
factories, extended  use  of  machinery,  a  spirit  of  enter- 
prise pushed  to  audacity  and  at  times  to  the  point  of 
temerity.  The  following  abuses,  though  they  were  not 
talked  about  officially,  were  the  cause  of  a  great  deal  of 
grumbling:  unscrupulous  operations  such  as  noisy  and 
charlatanical  advertising,  disloyal  weapons  such  as  the 
commercial  spying  system,  intrigues  to  supplant  the  com- 
petitor, the  concealment  of  poor  quality  under  the  guise 
of  a  known  product. 

The  industrial  and  commercial  superiority  of  England 
was  battered  .  .  .  already  to  the  point  of  tottering. 
There  was  a  feeling  of  bitterness  which  left  little  place 
for  the  sympathy  of  former  times.  It  was  not  only  in 
commercial  rivalry,  however,  that  Germany  engaged. 
She  also  entered  into  competition  with  England  for  the 
supremacy  of  the  seas.  After  the  accession  of  William 
II  (1888),  and  especially  after  the  disgrace  of  Bismarck 
(1890),  Germany  adopted  the  policy  of  great  naval  ar- 
maments. The  German  fleet,  scarcely  existing  in  1870, 
composed  only  of  thirteen  armoured  men-of-war  at  the 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     89 

death  of  William  I,  grew  with  a  rapidity  which  showed 
the  will  of  the  Emperor  and  his  naval  advisers  to  spare 
no  effort  or  expense  in  equalling  the  number  of  unities, 
the  tonnage,  the  artillery  power,  etc.,  of  the  English  fleet. 
The  naval  law  of  1898  decided  that,  in  three  years,  eleven 
battle-ships  without  counting  cruisers  and  smaller  unities, 
should  be  constructed.  Two  years  later,  in  1900,  a  new 
law  was  passed  to  reinforce  this  programme  and  increased 
still  more  the  number  of  units  to  be  built.  In  1920  the 
German  fleet  was  to  comprise  38  first-class  battle-ships, 
14  armoured  cruisers,  38  protected  cruisers,  and  96  de- 
stroyers. For  what  purpose  was  this  formidable  fleet 
created?1  "We  are  threatening  no  one,"  William  II 
had  declared,  "our  fleet  is  the  sign  of  our  power  and  the 
necessary  defensive  organ  for  the  protection  of  our  mer- 
chant marine. ' '  Despite  these  pacific  declarations,  England 
felt  herself  no  longer  safe  and  the  traditional  friendship 
for  her  trans-Rhenan  cousin  waxed  cold. 

In  reality  the  creation  of  a  powerful  war  fleet  meant 
that  the  ambitions  of  Germany  reached  henceforth  no 
longer  to  Europe  alone  but  to  the  entire  world.  The 
fleet  was  the  instrument  of  the  new  far-reaching  designs 
of  the  colonial  and  world  policy  to  which  William  II  was 

1  NOTE  BY  TRANSLATOR:  That  is  precisely  the  question  which  must  be 
answered  in  order  to  answer  this  other  question:  who  started  the  war?  .  .  . 
With  the  most  powerful  army  in  Europe  Germany  was  bidding  strongly 
for  the  most  powerful  fleet  also.  These  two  things:  the  biggest  army 
plus  the  biggest  fleet,  with  the  system  of  alliance  in  effect  before  the  war, 
meant  certain  victory.  There  is  a  plus  in  that  problem  which  cannot  be 
eliminated  and  that  plus  is  on  the  German  side.  .  . .  England  with  the  most 
powerful  fleet  but  practically  no  army  stood  much  less  chance  of  getting  to 
Berlin  than  Germany  did  of  getting  to  London.  But  England  meant  to 
have  her  land-fighting  done  by  France  and  Russia?  No  .  .  .  the  early 
results  of  the  war  prove,  if  they  prove  anything,  that  without  Italy  and 
without  Kitchener's  army,  France  insufficiently  prepared  <tnd  Russia  poorly 
organized  would  have  probably  suffered  defeat,  just  as  England  would 
have  suffered  defeat  in  the  long  run,  had  it  not  been  for  the  armies  of 
France.  No  one  knew  this  better  than  the  German  General  Staff. 


90     From  " Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale" 

engaging  his  people.  This  new  naval  arm  would  serve 
to  support  abroad  the  system  of  intimidations  and  threats 
which  the  land  forces  served  to  support  on  the  frontiers 
of  the  Vosges  and  on  the  Vistula.  And  thus  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  1900,  England  could  no  longer  entertain 
any  illusion  as  to  the  country  aimed  at,  or  as  to  which 
would  be  the  object  of  aggression  on  the  first  serious 
clash  of  interests. 

Now,  such  divergences  were  already  visible.  Germany 
was  allowing  her  designs  on  the  East  to  show  themselves. 
By  holding  her  hand  in  the  Armenian  affair  and  by 
permitting  London,  Paris,  Vienna,  and  Petrograd  to  protest 
against  the  massacres  and  impose  the  reparations  and 
the  guarantees,  Germany  had  become  persona  grata  with 
the  Porte.  She  sent  to  Constantinople  her  best  diplo- 
mats who  obtained  commercial  advantages,  government 
orders,  navigation  charters,  and  contracts  for  important 
public  works.  William  II  had  nothing  but  flatteries 
for  Abdul-Hamid.  The  crowning  reward  for  these 
courtesies  was  the  concession,  in  1899,  of  the  Bagdad 
Railroad,  a  transaction  destined  to  put  into  German 
hands  the  most  rapid  line  of  communication  between 
Europe  and  India.  England  showed  her  ill-humour 
by  asserting  her  rights  over  the  Sultanate  of  Koweit 
which  was  to  be  the  terminus  of  the  railroad.  In  China, 
England,  who  had  facilitated  the  establishment  of  the 
Kiao-Chau  station,  expected  in  return  the  support  of 
Germany  against  the  Russian  advance  in  Manchuria. 
But  when,  in  1901,  she  formally  asked  Berlin  to  unite 
with  her  to  prevent  the  conclusion  of  the  Russo-Chinese 
treaty  which  delivered  Manchuria  into  the  hands  of 
Russian  functionaries,  Germany  avoided  the  question 
and  rendered  all  intervention  impossible. 

These  conflicts  of  views  and  interests,  together  with 


From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale"     91 

the  underlying  causes  of  dissension,  that  is  with  the 
existing  economic  and  maritime  rivalry,  and  also  with  the 
active  causes,  that  is  with  the  entrance  of  new  figures 
on  the  political  stage,  explain  the  great  event  of  1904, 
which,  as  we  can  see  clearly  today,  was  of  capital  impor- 
tance and  destined  to  save  Europe  from  German  tyranny : 
that  event  was  the  Entente  Cordiale.  King  Edward  had 
played  a  preponderant  r61e  in  the  Anglo-French  reconcilia- 
tion, but  the  new  direction  it  gave  to  English  policy  was 
so  much  in  accord  with  the  veritable  interests  of  the 
country  and  the  national  aspirations,  that  the  Entente 
Cordiale  immediately  became  popular.  French  ships  and 
French  sailors  were  acclaimed  in  the  ports  of  Great 
Britain,  government  leaders  exchanged  visits,  members 
of  Parliament  and  municipalities  of  great  towns  met, 
sometimes  on  this  side  and  sometimes  on  the  other  side 
of  the  Channel,  in  brilliant  and  enthusiastic  receptions; 
characteristically  enough  the  Frenchman  became  a 
popular  and  sympathetic  figure  in  the  music-halls.  In 
a  few  months  the  differences  which  had  divided  France 
and  England  for  years  were  settled  by  friendly  arrange- 
ment. The  respective  rights  of  the  fishermen  of  the 
two  nations  on  the  Newfoundland  banks  were  defined. 
We  became  the  undisputed  possessors  of  Madagascar. 
Certain  spheres  of  influence  and  a  neutral  zone  were 
mapped  out  in  Siam.  England  allowed  us  our  liberty 
of  action  in  Morocco  and  we  recognized  her  suzerainty 
in  Egypt.  Equitable  frontiers  were  outlined  between 
the  French  and  English  possessions  of  West  Africa.  A 
condominium  was  established  in  the  New  Hebrides. 

The  Russo-Japanese  War,  which  ended  in  1905,  cured 
Russia  of  her  fondness  for  perilous  adventures  in  distant 
countries  and  recalled  her  to  a  preoccupation  with  Euro- 
pean affairs.  Having  recognized  the  error  of  an  aggressive 
colonial  policy,  she  was  ready  to  guarantee,  with  England, 


92     From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale" 

the  integrity  of  the  Chinese  Empire,  secured  by  the  re- 
newal of  the  Anglo- Japanese  treaty  in  1905.  She  under- 
stood the  new  Entente  programme  of  action  which,  fore- 
going all  conquest,  was  to  be  devoted  in  the  two  home 
countries  to  the  pacific  solution  of  the  problems  of  liberty 
and  social  justice,  in  foreign  countries,  to  the  regime  of 
equity  among  nations,  and  in  distant  continents  to  the 
education  of  infant  peoples  and  to  the  productive  improve- 
ment of  uncultivated  territories.  Finally,  in  the  centre 
of  Europe,  was  there  not  a  nation,  full  of  power  yet  eager 
for  more,  rich  but  still  unsatisfied,  overflowing  with  force, 
exultant  with  pride,  famished  for  new  territories,  land 
hungry,  and  as  the  last  half -century  might  bear  witness,  a 
nation  intent  upon  increasing  and  reincreasing  its  armies, 
its  war  material,  its  battle-fleet  with  designs  in  view 
whose  clear  meaning  could  be  drawn  not  only  from 
threats  let  fall,  at  times,  from  the  mouth  of  its  sovereign, 
but  also  from  the  horrible  doctrine  of  force  upheld  by  its 
professional  warriors  and  statesmen?  Should  not  these 
three  great  nations,  converted  to  a  sentiment  of  mutual 
conciliation  and  concord,  unite  in  conscience  or,  at  least 
in  self-interest,  to  ward  off  the  common  danger? 

England  and  France,  disabused  by  the  menace  of  com- 
mon danger,  looked  at  each  other  with  eyes  unobscured 
by  the  prejudices  of  times  gone  by,  and  straightway  they 
understood!  The  reasons  which  we  have  for  esteeming 
and  loving  England  this  book  proposes  to  lay  open  to 
examination.  The  reasons  which  England  has  for  esteem- 
ing and  loving  France,  we  have  the  right  to  enumerate 
briefly  without  false  modesty.  England,  being  a  realist 
nation,  has  been  in  a  position  to  appreciate  the  energy 
by  the  force  of  which  we  have  surmounted  our  disasters. 
She  has  measured  our  vitality  and  strength  by  the  im- 
portance of  our  colonial  work  and  by  the  very  resistance 
of  which  we  have  given  proof  when  circumstances  brought 


From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale"     93 

us  face  to  face  with  her.  When  in  the  Soudan,  in  obedi- 
ence to  orders  received  from  London,  Kitchener  opposed 
Marchand's  advance,  we  may  be  sure  that  he  had  a  feel- 
ing of  respect  for  this  daring  leader  and  for  the  enterprising 
people  who  dared  follow  their  own  course  even  at  the  risk 
of  great  danger.  Englishmen  respect  us  because  in  the 
past  they  proved  us  to  be  worthy  adversaries,  resolute 
and  fair-minded  like  themselves.  Such  adversaries,  after 
having  tried  each  other's  strength  on  the  field  and  hav- 
ing held  firm  with  equal  valour,  may  very  well  meet  each 
other  at  the  end  of  the  war  and  shake  hands  and  there- 
after entertain  for  each  other  no  other  feeling  than  that 
of  admiration. 

France,  who  knew  how  to  win  respect  with  her  courage 
and  spirit  of  enterprise,  knew  how  to  inspire  confidence 
also.  We  criticise  ourselves  very  severely  in  France 
and  perhaps  we  should  not  regret  doing  so;  England, 
however,  since  she  has  been  observing  us  in  a  kindly 
spirit,  is  able  to  render  us  justice.  She  no  longer  thinks 
of  us  as  a  volatile  and  changeable  nation  inclined  to  let  riot 
run  loose  in  the  street  or  unchain  the  dogs  of  war  on  the 
frontier.  Today  our  civil  virtues  find  their  expression 
in  our  public  virtues.  The  Republic  has  been  accepted 
by  all,  has  been  firmly  established,  and  has  been  organized 
with  sufficient  order  and  steadfastness  of  purpose  to 
produce  tangible  and  lasting  results.  The  Republic  has 
never  lacked  statesmen  to  direct  the  affairs  of  the  country 
in  its  difficult  passes.  Despite  party  quarrels,  its  foreign 
policy  has  shown  penetration,  flexibility,  and  firmness, 
with  a  keen  sense  of  the  responsibilities  of  the  hour  and 
historical  continuity.  Its  finances  are  among  the  most 
solid  in  the  world.  Its  colonial  administration,  constantly 
progressing,  has  been  able  to  solve  numerous  practical 
problems  difficult  to  handle  and,  at  the  same  time,  has 
proved  itself  so  humane  that  in  all  lands  where  peace 


94     From  "Isolation"  to  " Entente  Cordiale" 

has  been  established  by  France,  the  people  are  happy. 
Its  army  has  improved  and  grown  to  the  point  of  becom- 
ing one  of  the  most  effective  instruments  of  war  in  Europe 
and  of  giving  pause  to  the  formidable  power  of  the  Ger- 
man army.  More  and  more,  in  political  matters,  French 
citizens  temper  with  moderation  and  discipline  their 
habits  of  liberty.  The  parties  are  organizing  themselves, 
the  spirit  of  association  is  developing,  we  are  preparing 
with  patience  and  foresight  the  reforms  which  avert 
revolution.  Our  national  character,  our  national  institu- 
tions, and  our  national  vigour  furnish  henceforth  guaran- 
tees capable  of  encouraging  a  serious  and  thoughtful 
people  like  the  English  to  give  us  their  friendship. 

Reassured  by  this  newly-acquired  faculty  in  France  to 
develop,  within  her  borders,  the  rightful  exercise  of  or- 
dered liberty,  our  neighbours  across  the  Channel  have, 
In  turn,  shown  themselves  better  able  to  appreciate  and 
welcome  French  idealism.  The  two  nations  have  re- 
cognized each  other  as  makers  of  civilization  by  comple- 
mentary qualities  which  ought  to  be  united  for  the  greater 
benefit  of  Europe.  These  moral  causes  no  less  than  the 
political  and  economic  causes  have  constituted  the  ce- 
ment of  the  Entente  Cordiale.  As  soon  as  the  last  mate- 
rial obstacles  opposing  its  conclusion  had  fallen  in  1904, 
the  Entente  was  consolidated  with  enthusiasm. 

It  was  the  moment  that  Germany  chose  to  try  ard 
intimidate  England,  whom  she  felt  slipping  away  from 
her,  France,  who  continued  "to  gaze  on  the  blue  line  of 
the  Vosges,"  and  Russia,  France's  friend,  already  dis- 
abused of  the  Asiatic  adventure,  ...  by  noisily  affirm- 
ing her  pretensions  in  Morocco,  and,  soon  after,  by 
encouraging  the  encroachments  of  her  ally  Austria  in  the 
Balkans.  From  1905  on,  the  foreign  policy  of  England 
consists  essentially  in  the  tightening  of  her  bonds  of 
friendship  with  France,  in  the  formation  of  bonds  of 


From  "Isolation"  to  "Entente  Cordiale"     95 

friendship  with  Russia,  and  in  her  constant  efforts,  carried 
to  the  limit  of  her  power,  to  conserve  friendly  relations 
with  Germany  with  due  respect  to  her  own  independence 
and  dignity.  The  history  of  these  last  ten  years  may 
be  entitled:  "How  England  worked  for  peace."  That  is 
the  subject  we  are  now  going  to  enter  upon. 


CHAPTER  V 

What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace. 
19O4-1914 

IN  1904,  England  abandoned  her  tradition  of  "splendid 
isolation"  and  held  out  her  hand  to  France.  The 
Entente  Cordiale  was  an  insurance  against  the  Ger- 
man menace,  just  as  the  Franco-Russian  alliance  of  1891 
had  been,  but  neither  England  nor  France,  any  more  than 
Russia,  wanted  to  threaten  Germany  with  a  counter- 
menace  or  to  assume  a  provocative  attitude  towards  her. 
France  aspired  only  to  become  free  once  more  to  fulfil 
her  destiny  as  a  civilizing  and  emancipating  power, 
hoping  that,  in  the  distant  future,  the  progress  of  the 
spirit  of  justice  would  secure  to  her  the  reparations  that 
were  legally  her  due.  Russia,  in  the  midst  of  an  economic 
and  political  evolution,  desired  nothing  further  than  a 
peace  that  would  permit  her  to  devote  herself  to  domestic 
reforms.  England,  prudent  now  and  liberal,  preoccupied 
with  the  Irish  problem  as  well  as  with  social  difficulties  at 
home  and  ambitious  of  nothing  beyond  a  pacific  form  of 
imperialism,  wanted  simply  to  preserve  the  status  quo 
from  any  attempt  at  conquering  hegemony.  Her  time- 
honoured  policy  of  maintaining  the  balance  of  power 
had  lost  the  haughty  and  troublesome  character  which 
it  still  had  in  1853.  Rational  idealism  was  making  con- 
stant progress  in  every  sphere  of  English  activity  and 
particularly  in  that  of  her  international  politics;  her 

96 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace    97 

insular  individualism  was  diminishing  year  by  year, 
without  any  consequent  diminution  in  the  vigour  of  her 
originality  and  with  an  appreciable  lessening  of  the  dis- 
tance which  separated  her  from  the  progressive  elements 
of  continental  thought.  Indeed,  what  government  or 
what  ruler — except  in  the  country  which  had  cynically 
abjured  humanity  and  promulgated  the  barbarous  doc- 
trine of  force — would  have  engaged  light-heartedly  in  a 
war  which,  by  the  destroying  power  of  deadly  engines, 
by  its  engagement  of  enormous  masses  of  armed  men, 
and  by  the  clash  of  powerful  coalitions,  was  bound  to  prove 
the  most  terrible  of  conflagrations. 

Aided  by  her  traditional  talent  for  compromise  and 
her  determination  to  keep  the  peace,  England  laboured 
for  ten  years  in  a  conciliating  spirit,  but  without  humilia- 
tion or  backsliding,  to  save  the  status  quo  in  Europe. 
This  end  she  tried  to  attain  by  overtures  and  by  conces- 
sions which  she  amplified  and  repeated  until  the  hour 
when  Germany's  madness  precipitated  the  conflict. 
She  supplemented  the  Entente  Cordiale  with  France  by 
agreements  with  Italy  (1903),  with  Spain  (1904),  and  with 
Russia  (1907).  The  Triple  Entente,  flanked  by  minor 
ententes,  became  the  bulwark  of  peace  in  Europe.  To 
the  Triple  Alliance  which  was  in  process  of  transforming 
itself  practically  into  a  purely  Germanic  coalition,  she 
opposed  a  .policy  of  counter  action,  and  not  one  of 
encircling  (Germany's  pretensions  to  the  contrary  notwith- 
standing). The  burning  questions  of  Morocco,  the  Bal- 
kans, and  the  respective  national  spheres  of  influence  in 
Asia  Minor  were  given  provisional  solutions  which  might 
easily  have  been  perfected  and  made  permanent.  The 
question  of  the  limitation  of  armament  and  fleets  might 
have  been  settled  by  private  agreement  and  ratified  by 
The  Hague  Conference.  But  it  appeared  that  nothing 
could  satisfy  this  all-engulfing  Germanism  except  univer- 


98    What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

sal  supremacy  and  the  enslavement  of  nations.  It  was 
this  spirit  that  willed  the  war.  It  was  not  England's 
fault  that  the  irreparable  act  was  not  avoided. 


The  Anglo-French  agreement  about  Morocco  in  1902, 
completed  by  the  Mediterranean  agreement  between 
England,  France,  and  Spain  in  1904,  was  directed  against 
no  one  and  interfered  with  the  interests  of  no  nation. 
Concerning  Morocco,  we  undertook  to  respect  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  Sultan  and  the  political  state  of  the 
country ;  we  left  the  door  open  to  international  commerce. 
In  consideration  of  our  proximity  to  Algeria  and  of  that 
colony's  constant  danger  from  anarchy  in  Morocco,  the 
right  was  accorded  us  of  merely  helping  the  Maghzen 
to  re-establish  order  and  to  exercise  his  effective  authority 
over  all  the  provinces  of  the  Empire.  This  agreement, 
the  first-fruit  of  the  Anglo-French  friendship,  had  the 
effect,  however,  of  exciting  the  anger  of  Germany.  The 
Entente  Cordiale,  although  of  an  entirely  pacific  nature, 
had  been  greeted  in  Germany  as  a  menace.  To  try  and 
establish  the  balance  of  power  on  a  friendly  basis  repre- 
sented in  the  minds  of  our  neighbours  across  the  Rhine, 
an  affront  to  German  power;  for,  even  at  this  stage,  Ger- 
man power  was  unwilling  to  tolerate  organization  against 
the  system  of  intimidation  by  which  it  meant  to  further 
its  designs  of  aggrandizement  in  the  world.  It  had 
decided  that  Morocco  would  be  the  point  where  it  would 
establish  a  base  on  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  and  whence 
it  would  expand  toward  the  Orient,  overthrowing  France 
in  Algeria  and  then  England  in  Egypt.  From  the  time  of 
the  Anglo-French  agreement  on,  the  tone  of  the  German 
press  became  aggressive  and  the  Emperor  seized  every 
possible  occasion  to  pronounce  those  warlike  speeches  of 
his,  filled  with  phrases  that  rang  as  the  clatter  of  steel, 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace    99 

designed  to  keep  aflame  the  fever  of  chauvinism  in  Ger- 
many and  to  serve  as  a  warning  abroad. 

On  March  31,  1905,  it  was  learned  that  the  Kaiser 
had  arrived  in  Tangiers  on  the  steamer  Hamburg,  escorted 
by  the  cruiser  Frederick-Charles,  and  had  paid  a  visit  to 
the  uncle  of  the  Sultan,  on  which  occasion  he  had  used 
the  following  significant  words:  "It  is  to  the  Sultan  of 
Morocco,  an  independent  sovereign,  that  I  am  paying 
this  visit.  ..."  A  month  later,  the  Prince  of  Bulow, 
Imperial  Chancellor,  proposed  to  the  Powers  the  sum- 
moning of  an  international  conference  for  the  purpose  of 
settling  the  question  of  reforms  in  Morocco.  This  was  a 
direct  thrust  at  France  and  an  order,  which  to  resist 
meant  war.  France  was  not  prepared:  the  Foreign 
Secretary  resigned  and  the  Conference  opened.  Thanks 
to  the  firm  support  of  England,  to  the  goodwill  of  Italy, 
to  the  friendly  intervention  of  the  United  States,  and 
finally  to  the  skill  of  our  plenipotentiary,  the  issue  of  the 
Conference  of  Algeciras  was  contrary  to  the  designs  of 
Germany.  Our  situation  in  Morocco,  under  seal  of  the 
guarantees  which  we  had  furnished  from  the  start  to 
foreign  commerce,  was  recognized  by  all  the  nations. 
The  Conference  had  two  fortunate  results:  i,  it  asserted 
the  value  of  the  Anglo-French  entente,  which,  as  someone 
said,  passed  from  a  static  to  a  dynamic  state;  2,  it  was  the 
occasion  of  the  first  of  those  conversations  which  were, 
a  year  later,  to  bring  about  the  Anglo-Russian  entente 
and  thus  render  the  Triple  Entente  a  possibility. 

Germany  chafed  with  impatience  and  secretly  prepared 
for  new  and  more  redoubtable  interventions.  Mean- 
while she  decided  to  hasten  the  growth  of  her  fleet.  It 
was  in  1900,  at  the  time  when  the  Transvaal  War  had 
roused  an  ill-suppressed  burst  of  anger  in  Germany,  that  the 
Reichstag  had  voted  the  first  great  "naval  programme." 
In  1906,  this  programme  was  augmented.  The  former 


loo  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

naval  budget  of  185,000,000  Mk.  jumped  to  310,000,000. 
It  was  proposed  to  enlarge  the  Kiel  Canal  to  give  battle- 
ships of  the  dreadnought  class  access  to  it.  The  Anglo- 
German  naval  rivalry  was  fast  approaching  a  crisis. 


England,  however,  without  neglecting  reasonable 
means  of  protection  from  the  danger,  was  seeking  to 
create  an  atmosphere  of  peace  throughout  Europe.  She 
had  attended  the  first  Hague  Conference  convoked  at  the 
suggestion  of  the  Czar  of  Russia  in  1899,  and  the  First 
Lord  of  the  Admiralty,  Mr.  Goschen,  had  declared  to 
the  Assembly  that,  although  it  was  impossible  to  change 
the  relative  position  of  Great  Britain,  if  the  other  Powers 
would  agree  to  reduce  their  naval  construction  programme, 
England  would  fall  in  with  the  movement.  England  had 
also  signed  the  first  arbitration  treaties,  and  had  agreed 
to  lay  before  an  international  tribunal  the  grave  incident 
of  Hull,  when  Russian  warships  on  their  way  to  the 
Pacific  had  fired  upon  a  flotilla  of  English  fishing  smacks. 
In  1907,  at  the  second  Hague  Conference,  it  was  she  who 
took  the  initiative  in  a  new  proposal  for  the  reduction 
of  armaments.  As  proof  of  good  faith  and  to  encourage 
other  nations,  the  English  Government  had  announced, 
in  July,  1906,  that  the  English  naval  construction  pro- 
gramme would  be  reduced  25%  for  battle-ships,  60%  for 
destroyers,  and  33%  for  submarines — and  that  would 
be  done  despite  the  considerable  increase  in  German 
naval  construction  during  the  same  year. 

The  Emperor  of  Germany  informed  the  British  Ambas- 
sador that  if  the  question  of  disarmament  was  put  to  the 
Conference,  he  would  refuse  to  be  represented  there. 
King  Edward's  visit  to  Cronberg  and  the  subsequent 
semi-official  visit  to  Berlin  made  by  the  Secretary  of 
War,  Mr.  Haldane,  whose  German  sympathies  were  well 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  101 

known,  only  resulted  in  a  confirmation  of  William  II 's 
decision. 

England,  however,  did  not  consider  herself  beaten. 
An  article  signed  by  the  Prime  Minister,  Sir  H.  Campbell- 
Bannerman,  was  printed  in  The  Nation  (March,  1907), 
renewing  the  English  proposal.  The  Prince  of  Bulow 
replied,  in  the  Reichstag,  that  "the  Imperial  Government 
could  not  take  part  in  a  discussion  which,  in  his  opinion, 
was  not  at  all  likely  to  lead  to  practical  results,  and  which 
on  the  contrary  entailed  certain  risks."  (April,  1907.) 
All  that  England  was  able  to  accomplish  at  the  Confer- 
ence was  to  declare  through  her  representative  Sir  E. 
Grey  that  she  was  ready  to  compare  notes  beforehand 
with  any  Power  whatsoever  regarding  her  naval  budget 
estimates,  in  the  hope  that  this  exchange  of  information 
would  lead  to  a  reduction  of  expenses. 

If,  then,  an  international  agreement  should  prove  im- 
possible, the  way  was  left  open  for  a  private  arrangement 
between  .the  two  nations.  In  the  autumn  of  1907,  the 
Emperor  visited  England,  and,  in  a  speech  at  the  Guild- 
hall, expressed  with  warmth  his  sentiments  of  friendship 
for  the  English  nation.  But  in  the  following  year,  at  the 
instance  of  the  German  Admiralty  a  new  naval  law  was 
voted,  the  law  of  1908,  which,  by  providing  for  the  con- 
tinuous construction  of  new  battle-ships,  guaranteed  an 
automatic  and  constant  rejuvenation  of  the  German 
navy,  and  established  a  strong  reserve  composed  of  ^the 
older  unities.  The  naval  budget  leaped  from  310,000,000 
to  445,000,000  Mk.  It  is  true  that  Admiral  von  Tirpitz 
proclaimed  from  the  tribune  of  the  Reichstag,  that 
"Germany  was  constructing  her  fleet  against  none"; 
he  even  added,  speaking  of  England:  "We  do  not  want  to 
compete  with  that  naval  power,  nor  dispute  the  supre- 
macy of  the  seas  with  her."1  But  how  could  England 

1  German  policy  was  a  policy  of  duplicity  which  consisted  in  calming 


102  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

possibly  feel  unconcerned  about  the  matter?  Naval 
supremacy  is  a  question  of  life  and  death  for  her;  let  the 
superiority  of  her  fleet  diminish  or  disappear,  and  her 
colonial  empire  is  not  only  at  the  mercy  of  an  aggressor, 
but  the  country  itself  may  be  reduced  to  starvation. 
Vet  England  had  no  wish  to  engage  in  a  maritime  out- 
bidding contest  without  having  made  another  attempt 
to  effect  a  settlement. 

King  Edward  was  once  more  the  messenger  of  peace. 
He  was  accompanied  on  a  visit  to  Berlin  in  1908,  by  a 
member  of  the  Cabinet,  C.  Hardinge,  charged  with  the 
task  of  presenting  the  views  of  the  Government.  Both 
King  and  Minister  met  with  the  usual  polite  reception 
and  courteous  speeches,  also  with  the  accustomed  obsti- 
nate rejection  of  overtures.  There  was  nothing  else  for 
England  to  do  but  to  take  the  measures  which  she  had 

English  alarm  with  fine  words  whenever  an  English  proposal  for  settlement 
was  advanced  or  whenever  a  new  increase  in  the  German  naval  programme 
made  the  German  threat  more  glaringly  evident.  Von  Bulow,  in  his  book 
on  The  German  Policy  (French  translation  by  M.  Maurice  Herbette,  P. 
Lavauzelle,  1914),  so  studiously  calculated  to  inspire  confidence  abroad 
in  Germany's  pacific  intentions,  unintentionally  discloses  the  truth.  "It 
was  necessary,"  said  he,  while  appreciating  the  policy  of  William  II,  "to 
show  the  German  people  how  to  obtain  a  place  in  the  sun,  a  place  to  which 
it  had  a  right  and  towards  the  securing  of  which  all  its  efforts  must  be 
directed;  but  the  sentiment  of  patriotism  ought  not  to  be  permitted  on 
the  other  hand  to  pass  its  proper  bounds  and  irremediably  derange  our  rela- 
tions with  England.  .  .  .  We  should  not  allow  ourselves  to  be  dominated 
in  our  purposes  and  acts  by  a  policy  directed  against  England;  but  on 
the  other  hand,  we  ought  not  to  place  ourselves  in  a  position  of  depen- 
dence on  the  English,  with  a  view  to  winning  their  friendship.  ...  As 
to  that  country's  friendship,  we  could  have  won  it  only  by  sacrificing 
our  plans  of  world  policy;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  as  enemies  of  England 
we  could  not  without  great  difficulty  have  developed  our  commercial  and 
maritime  power  to  the  point  which  it  has  finally  attained."  It  is  im- 
possible to  state  more  clearly  (without  confessing  the  insincerity  of  the 
protestations  of  goodwill)  that  it  was  really  a  matter  of  lulling  the  English 
lion  to  sleep  until  the  hour  when  it  would  be  possible  to  surprise  him 
without  defence. 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  103 

deferred  to  the  last  moment,  namely,  to  accelerate  her 
naval  construction.  This  she  did  in  1909  and  1910. 
At  the  same  time  the  army  was  reorganized.  The  volun- 
teers, who  had  been  almost  free  of  all  official  control 
until  then,  formed  henceforth  a  "territorial  army"  des- 
tined to  defend  the  native  soil  and  whose  strength  was 
to  be  raised  to  three  hundred  thousand,  with  196  batteries 
and  a  brigade  of  yeomanry  for  each  division.  The  regu- 
lar army,  relieved  of  the  duty  of  home  defence,  could 
deduct  from  its  total  strength  an  "expeditionary  corps" 
of  166,000  men  which  could  immediately  be  sent  wher- 
ever the  exigencies  of  England's  ententes  might  require. 
These  precautions  were  purely  defensive;  the  door  was 
by  no  means  closed  to  new  negotiations  with  Germany. 
The  conciliatory  intentions  of  the  Liberal  Government 
were  made  evident  by  the  very  way  in  which  it  proceeded 
to  carry  these  reforms  into  effect  and  in  its  manner  of 
increasing  the  naval  armaments. 

Mr.  Asquith,  feeling  the  need  of  quieting  the  appre- 
hensions of  the  country,  and,  wishing  at  the  same  time 
to  pursue  his  policy  of  conciliation  and  of  peaceful  over- 
tures, proposed  for  1909-10,  the  construction  of  four 
dreadnoughts  to  be  ready  in  1911,  and,  in  principle,  the 
building  of  four  others  which  were  to  be  put  in  dock 
only  if  their  construction  seemed  necessary  to  the  Gov- 
ernment. These  four  conditional  dreadnoughts  were 
stipulated  in  view  of  the  rapid  increase  of  the  German 
naval  programme  and  indicated  England's  determination 
to  conserve  her  acquired  position,  but  left  the  Govern- 
ment of  Berlin  the  alternative  of  moderating  or  putting 
a  stop  to  the  race  for  armament  supremacy  by  tacit 
consent  and  without  fresh  negotiations.  The  formal 
proposals  of  settlement  having  failed,  it  was  still  hoped 
that  a  sentiment  of  prudence  and  good  sense  would  pre- 
vail in  the  counsels  of  the  Wilhelmstrasse ;  it  was  made 


104  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

clear  to  Germany  that  any  such  movement  would  imme- 
diately be  acknowledged  by  a  reduction  in  the  construc- 
tions provided  for  in  the  budget. 

On  the  other  hand,  precautions  were  taken  against  a 
possible  and  sudden  outbreak  of  German  hostility  by 
ordering  a  concentration  of  the  High  Seas  Fleet  in  home 
waters.  A  new  naval  base  was  to  be  constructed  at 
Rosyth,  in  the  Firth  of  Forth,  destined  to  play  the  same 
r61e  in  the  North  Sea  as  Portsmouth  in  the  Channel. 
A  naval  arrangement  with  France  was  to  entrust  her 
with  the  defence  of  the  Mediterranean  and  was  to  liberate 
a  certain  number  of  important  unities  for  the  reinforce- 
ment of  the  Home  Fleet. 

These  measures  of  prudence  were  not  without  value. 
Taking  advantage  of  the  revolution  in  Turkey,  Austria 
annexed  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina.  There  was  a  great 
stir  in  Europe:  the  principle  of  the  integrity  of  the  Otto- 
man Empire,  affirmed  in  1856  and  in  1878  by  European 
congresses,  was  ignored.  The  corollary  to  that  principle, 
namely,  "the  Balkans  for  the  Balkan  peoples,"  which  was 
advantageous  to  the  aspirations  of  the  nationalities  con- 
cerned and  opposed  a  barrier  to  the  antagonistic  appetites 
of  the  Powers,  also  fell,  through  the  foolhardy  action  of 
Baron  d'Aerenthal.  Servia,  who  cherished  the  hope  of 
joining  hands  some  day  with  her  Slavic  brothers  of  the 
Adriatic  coast,  was  cruelly  deceived. 

The  Triple  Entente  proposed  the  convocation  of  a 
European  Congress.  A  few  years  earlier  at  a  time  when 
the  Vienna  Government,  still  moderate  and  pacific, 
manifested  a  relative  independence  of  its  powerful  ally 
at  Berlin  and  lent  a  willing  ear  to  the  suggestions  of 
London,  the  idea  of  the  Congress  would  have  been  ac- 
cepted without  demur.  But  it  soon  appeared  that  the 
conditions  had  changed.  The  Archduke  Francois-Fer- 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  105 

dinand  had  devised  great  plans  for  his  country;  he  was 
now  looking  to  Germany  for  support  and  protection.  The 
ambitions  of  the  two  Germanic  Empires  were  united  for 
the  purpose  of  mutual  reinforcement  and  to  emphasize 
by  concerted  measures  the  Drang  nach  Osten,  the  "push 
to  the  East,"  Germany  with  the  Bagdad  Railroad,  and 
Austria  by  her  territorial  gains  in  the  Balkans.  Servia, 
extremely  incensed,  bristled  with  anger  and  made  an 
appeal  to  Russia,  her  great  Slavonic  sister.  But  the 
Kaiser  flashed  the  white  of  his  sword  and  Russia  yielded 
as  France  had  yielded  in  1905.  The  idea  of  the  European 
Congress  was  abandoned.  Some  time  afterwards,  dur- 
ing a  visit  to  Vienna,  William  II  reminded  his  hosts  in 
a  fanfare  of  rhetoric,  that  he  had  come  "in  shining  ar- 
mour," to  take  his  place  beside  his  Germanic  ally  and  to 
express  his  joy  at  seeing  the  union  of  the  two  peoples  so 
intimately  sealed.  Through  the  fault  of  Austria  and 
Germany,  the  Eastern  question,  along  with  the  Moroccan 
question,  was  fast  becoming  a  centre  of  latent  conflict 
whence  might  burst  some  day  the  flame  of  a  great 
conflagration. 

Until  the  last  moment,  England  worked  for  peace,  as 
far  as  it  was  possible  for  her  to  do  so  without  jeopardizing 
the  century-long  inheritance  bequeathed  her  by  her 
ancestors  and  without  abjuring  the  ententes  with  which 
she  had  linked  her  honour  and  her  hope  of  preserving 
the  balance  of  power  in  Europe. 

The  situation  of  the  Liberal  Cabinet  was  difficult.  It 
was  engaged,  at  home,  in  a  titanic  struggle  for  the  demo- 
cratic and  social  transformation  of  England  and  for  the 
redress  of  English  wrongs  towards  Ireland.  The  reform 
of  the  House  of  Lords,  the  legislation  in  favour  of  working 
men,  the  policy  of  social  assistance,  the  establishment 
of  a  progressive  tax  and  of  new  taxes  on  the  land  and 


io6  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

unearned  riches,  the  disestablishment  of  the  Welsh 
Church,  the  Irish  Home  Rule  bill,  raised  against  the 
Liberal  party  a  block  of  Conservatives,  owners  and 
Unionists.  Its  heterogeneous  majority  was  too  pre- 
carious and  too  uncertain  to  allow  of  its  running  the 
risk  of  displeasing  a  single  group.  Now,  among  the 
groups  whose  votes  were  indispensable  were  the  Radicals 
and  the  Labour  party,  both  of  which  professed  pacific 
opinions.  These  groups,  feeling  that  the  obstacle  to 
peace  came  from  the  tension  of  English  relations  with 
Germany,  believed,  in  their  illusory  idealism,  that  it 
would  suffice  to  multiply  the  proofs  of  British  goodwill 
and  to  hold  out  a  friendly  hand  to  the  great  nation  beyond 
the  Rhine,  in  order  to  dissipate  the  clouds  fast  gathering 
in  the  East.  A  thorough  campaign  was  undertaken, 
through  the  press,  by  means  of  meetings  and  banquets, 
written  addresses  covered  with  hundreds  of  signatures, 
and  friendly  visits  graced  by  high-sounding  speeches, 
to  maintain  and  affirm  the  kindly  sentiments  which  were 
based  on  consanguinity.  The  Wilhelmstrasse  pressed 
vigorously,  if  not  always  discreetly,  on  this  fulcrum  in  the 
heart  of  English  opinion  and  of  the  parliamentary  parties 
themselves.  The  partisans  of  peace  did  not  seem  to 
notice  that  the  names  of  committee  presidents  and  the 
financial  sponsors  for  the  banquets  and  voyages  had  a 
German  ring  to  them  that  was  disguised  by  the  title  of 
Sir,  a  term  that  now  signifies  little  more  than  financial 
success.  They  were  astonished  at  times  that  the  most 
enthusiastic  declarations,  the  most  cordial  toasts  ex- 
changed on  English  or  German  soil,  were  followed  by  cold 
declarations  from  the  responsible  leaders  of  German  policy. 
But  when  the  first  disagreeable  impression  had  passed 
they  soon  forgot  all  about  it,  resuming  their  proceedings 
and  nursing  their  fond  hopes  once  more. 

It  is  to  the  man  who  has  directed  the  Foreign  Office 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  107 

since  1906,  to  the  distinguished  diplomatist,  Sir  E.  Grey, 
that  England  is  beholden  for  the  fact  that  she  was  able 
to  keep  to  a  course  both  of  moderation  and  firmness. 
Sir  E.  Grey,  whose  opinions  place  him  on  the  side  of 
democratic  and  social  reform,  is  attached,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  a  great  Whig  family,  to  the  old  governmental 
traditions  of  English  liberalism.  He  unites  in  his  person 
that  just  proportion  of  idealism  and  realism  which  gives 
weight  and  lucidity  to  the  best  minds  of  England,  this 
sanity  of  balance  being  made  possible  by  the  happy  tradi- 
tion of  "compromise."  His  reputation  of  being  a  gentle- 
man above  all  suspicion  of  insincerity  lends  great  weight 
to  his  words  whenever,  within  the  limits  of  diplomatic 
usage,  he  takes  upon  himself  to  make,  on  some  delicate 
point,  a  definite  affirmation  or  negation.  In  the  hours 
of  greatest  crises,  when  the  Cabinet  was  staking  its  exist- 
ence and  the  success  of  its  domestic  policy  upon  some 
point  in  its  foreign  policy,  he  was  quick  to  find  the  right 
words  for  satisfying  the  pacifists  and  reassuring  the 
alarmists.  The  synthesis  he  was  able  to  preserve  of  a 
broad  spirit  of  conciliation  and  the  firm  defence  of  British 
interests  always  made  it  possible  for  him  to  sympathize 
with  the  hopes  of  the  former  and  anticipate  the  prudence 
of  the  latter. 

The  speeches  of  the  Secretaries  of  State,  in  the  absence 
of  official  documents,  permit  a  reconstitution  of  the  foreign 
political  history  of  England  in  the  last  four  years.  Semi- 
official publications,  printed  since  the  commencement  of 
the  war  and  inspired  by  the  Government  or  at  least  not 
contradicted  by  it,  and  finally  the  Blue  Book  published 
shortly  after  the  opening  of  hostilities,  complete  the  series 
of  facts  destined  to  enlighten  us  concerning  the  efforts 
made  by  Great  Britain  to  preserve  peace  without  abdica- 
tion or  humiliation. 


io8  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

In  June,  1909,  the  Chancellor  von  Bulow  retired  and 
was  succeeded  by  Heir  von  Bethmann-Hollweg.  It  is 
customary,  when  a  change  is  made  in  the  ministerial 
personnel  of  a  State,  for  the  new-comers  to  specify  the 
main  lines  of  their  policy.  In  Germany,  where  the 
Emperor's  will  is  law,  the  Chancellor  is  not  obliged  to 
render  accounts  to  the  representative  Assembly.  But 
the  question  of  the  relations  between  Germany  and 
England  were  sufficiently  serious  to  cause  the  new  di- 
rector of  the  Wilhelmstrasse  to  seek  a  conversation  with 
the  Ambassador  of  England  and  to  attempt  to  renew  the 
negotiations  which  the  public  declarations  of  his  prede- 
cessor had  cut  short.  A  conversation  took  place  and 
the  British  Ambassador  was  surprised  to  receive  a  proposal 
for  the  renewal  of  pourparlers  on  the  subject  of  a  naval 
arrangement.  Germany,  however,  made  their  realiza- 
tion dependent  on  a  certain  condition:  namely,  that  any 
special  agreement  about  naval  constructions  should  be 
subordinated  to  a  general  understanding  about  the  main 
lines  of  foreign  policy  in  the  two  countries.  The  British 
Government  replied  that  it  was  ready  to  accept  any 
arrangement  not  incompatible  with  its  existing  obligations 
towards  other  Powers. 

Germany  could  not  be  unaware  that  the  Entente  with 
France  and  Russia  had  nothing  aggressive  about  it. 
The  Liberal  Government  had  given  repeated  proofs  of 
its  pacific  intentions,  and,  even  had  it  wished  to  depart 
therefrom,  it  would,  inevitably,  have  suffered  the  loss  of 
a  powerful  element  of  its  majority.  Frequent  public 
declarations  made  by  members  of  the  Cabinet  had 
clearly  specified  the  character  of  the  Ententes.  Sir  H. 
Campbell-Bannerman  had  said  in  1905  (i6th  November), 
speaking  of  France  and  making  allusion  to  the  negotia- 
tions in  course  with  Russia:  "  Lord  Lansdowne  has  done 
well  to  protest  against  the  idea  that  the  Entente  may 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  109 

imply  any  sentiment  of  hostility  towards  another  Power. 
Our  supply  of  good  feeling  and  international  goodwill  is 
not  exhausted  by  France.  Let  us  hope  that  this  wise 
policy  will  be  extended.  There  is  the  Russian  Empire, 
and,  then,  there  is  Germany."1 

In  1909,  Sir  E.  Grey  renewed  these  declarations:  there 
were  no  reasons  to  prevent  the  Entente  with  France 
and  Russia  being  completed  by  an  Entente  with  Ger- 
many; England  certainly  desired  nothing  better  than  to 
form  new  friendships,  on  condition  that  she  should  re- 
main faithful  to  the  old  ones.  .  .  .  Now  it  was  precisely 
from  this  fidelity  to  old  friendships  that  Germany  wished 
to  turn  her.  This  general  understanding  about  the  policy 
of  the  two  countries  was  nothing  less  than  an  attempt  to 
detach  England  from  the  Triple  Entente  for  the  purpose 
of  attaching  her  to  the  Germanic  alliance.  It  meant  a 
rupture  of  that  equilibrium  which  England  had  sought 
in  a  distribution  of  groups  of  Powers  equal  enough  to 
constitute  a  mutual  counterpoise. 

The  advantages  which  Herr  von  Bethmann-Hollweg 
offered  in  exchange  were  sufficiently  vague.  The  Ger- 
man naval  law  was  to  remain  untouched;  but  it  was 
proposed  to  "postpone  the  date  of  carrying  it  into  effect." 
Although  the  number  of  units  could  not  be  decreased, 
certain  important  units  destined  to  take  the  sea  in  1914, 
for  example,  would  be  launched  only  with  those  scheduled 
for  1916  or  1917.  In  return  for  that  England  was  asked 
not  to  intervene  if  Germany  were  attacked  by  one  or  two 
Powers.  Germany,  on  her  part,  would  subscribe  to  the 
same  bond  of  neutrality  in  case  an  attack  were  directed 
against  England. 

1  The  English  official  documents  are  laid  before  Parliament  in  a  White 
Book  but  they  are  put  on  sale  for  public  use,  in  a  Blue  Book.  I  am  employ- 
ing this  last  denomination  to  avoid  confusion  with  the  German  White 
Book. 


no  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

What  were  the  consequences  involved  in  this  agreement? 
England,  bound  by  friendship  to  France  and  Russia, 
had  no  reason  to  fear  an  attack  by  these  two  Powers: 
Germany's  promise  of  neutrality,  therefore,  would  bring 
her  no  advantage.  But  on  the  other  hand,  would  not  the 
neutrality  demanded  in  exchange  tie  her  hands  in  the 
case  of  a  conflict  that  might  compromise  the  balance  of 
power  in  Europe?  Suppose  war  was  declared  by  Austria 
against  Russia,  Germany  would  be  under  obligation  to 
join  her  ally;  Russia  attacked  by  two  Powers  would  have 
the  right  of  demanding  the  assistance  of  France.  A 
European  conflict  would  break  out  without  Germany's 
appearing  to  have  had  a  hand  in  it.  And  then  there  was 
another  consideration:  supposing  that  Germany,  as  it 
might  well  be  feared,  were  to  direct  her  operations  against 
France  through  Belgium,  England  would  not  be  able  to 
intervene  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  the  independence 
of  this  country  ...  an  independence  which  she  had 
guaranteed  by  the  treaty  of  1839  and  which  was  indispen- 
sable to  her  own  security. 

For  any  one  able  to  read  between  the  lines,  the  pro- 
posed agreement  was  nothing  more  than  an  offer  of 
complicity  in  the  designs  of  intimidation  and  perhaps 
of  aggression  pursued  by  the  two  Germanic  Empires 
against  France  and  Russia.  When  the  differences  with 
these  two  countries  had  once  been  settled,  the  German 
naval  programme,  postponed  for  a  time,  would  resume 
its  course  and  England  would  find  herself  alone  face  to 
face  with  Germany's  naval  power  plus  her  immense  mili- 
tary power,  which  would  have  acquired  in  Calais  or 
Antwerp  a  powerful  base  with  a  view  to  an  invasion. 
Against  this  danger,  German  goodwill  was  the  sole 
guarantee  which  was  left  England.  And  for  this 
hardly  enticing  prospect,  she  was  to  renounce  her  time- 
honoured  policy  of  maintaining  the  balance  of  power: 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  in 

she  was  to  violate  her  friendships  and  dishonour  her 
name! 

In  the  light  of  the  events  in  Morocco  in  1905  and  of  the 
Balkans  events  of  1908,  what  clear-sighted  statesmen 
would  have  dared  take  stock  in  German  moderation  and 
conciliation,  and  risk  the  future  and  the  honour  of  their 
country  for  such  a  return?  It  is  not  surprising  then, 
that  the  British  Government,  in  the  autumn  of  1909, 
declined  the  Chancellor's  offer. 

Neither  in  the  terms  of  the  refusal,  however,  nor  in 
the  words  or  deeds  of  the  English  Cabinet  in  what  fol- 
lowed, was  any  sentiment  manifested  which  was  not 
entirely  conciliatory  and  pacific  in  nature.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  desire  to  entertain  more  amicable  relations 
with  Germany  was  to  express  itself  on  more  than  one 
occasion.  The  determination  to  do  everything  possible 
to  facilitate  co-operation  was  more  than  once  on  the 
point  of  taking  shape  in  certain  effective  measures. 

In  the  absence  of  any  modification  of  the  German 
naval  programme,  England  dared  not  expose  herself  to 
the  risk  of  being  outdistanced.  Although  resolved  in 
the  interest  of  peace  and  of  the  resources  of  the  country 
to  reduce  the  naval  budget  to  a  minimum,  the  Liberal 
Government  could  not  reduce  the  indispensable  guaran- 
tees of  security.  The  chapter  of  naval  expenses  was 
increased  £5,000,000,  in  1910.  Mr.  Asquith  in  presenting 
the  budget  pronounced  the  following  words  (July,  1910) : 
"The  German  Government  postulates  the  impossibility 
of  reducing  its  naval  programme.  It  asserts,  and  we  are 
willing  to  believe,  that  public  opinion  in  Germany  would 
not  allow  it  to  do  so."  The  German  Chancellor  replied 
before  the  Reichstag,  that  he  had  not  interposed  a  non 
possumus  to  the  English  proposition,  but  that  though  it 
would  be  impossible  to  reduce  the  naval  programme  he 


H2  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

would  be  ready  to  study  the  means  of  postponing  its 
effective  realization.  That  was  the  official  expression  of 
the  semi-official  propositions  made  some  time  previously. 
London  took  the  Chancellor  at  his  word,  consenting 
to  abandon  the  ground  of  the  "reduction"  of  arma- 
ments, and  placing  itself  on  the  ground  of  a  "temporary 
postponement."  The  naval  programme  of  the  two 
nations  was  to  be  maintained  in  the  status  quo,  but  infor- 
mation was  to  be  exchanged  periodically  concerning  the 
state  of  the  constructions  in  course,  in  order  to  permit  a 
slowing  down  by  mutual  consent. 

As  to  the  general  spirit  of  the  British  policy,  new  assur- 
ances were  publicly  given  that  it  bore  no  hostility  towards 
any  Power  whatsoever.  Sir  E.  Grey  made  a  speech  in 
which  he  measured  in  just  proportions,  the  affirmation 
of  the  pacific  intentions  of  England  and  the  expression 
of  the  steadfast  continuity  and  loyalty  of  her  previous 
engagements. 

It  would  surprise  people  [said  he]  if  it  were  known  how  easy 
it  has  been,  in  the  course  of  the  last  three  years,  I  do  not  say 
to  come  to  an  agreement,  but  to  discuss  frankly  the  differ- 
ences which  have  arisen  between  the  two  governments  (Eng- 
land and  Germany).  We  are  very  far  from  desiring  that 
our  relations  with  a  State  should  be  such  as  to  render  all 
cordial  intercourse  with  Germany  impossible. 

Then  he  added  to  make  the  necessary  reserves:  "Our 
policy  consists  in  remaining  staunchly  faithful  to  every 
engagement  to  which  we  have  subscribed,  but  at  the  same 
time,  in  doing  our  best  to  further  the  reign  of  goodwill 
everywhere." 

What  was  to  be  the  attitude  of  Berlin  in  response  to 
these  measures  of  conciliation  and  to  the  definite  proposals 
which  were  their  first  manifestation?  In  as  far  as  the 
"temporary  postponement"  was  concerned — a  proposi- 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  113 

tion  which  had  at  first  appeared  of  secondary  interest  to 
the  English  Government  but  to  which  it  had  subscribed 
out  of  a  spirit  of  goodwill — the  Chancellor  withdrew  his 
offer  (May,  1911),  pleading  the  necessity  of  furnishing 
a  regular  supply  to  German  industry.  This  pretext  was 
manifestly  only  a  subterfuge.  For  if  the  objection  were 
serious,  why  had  it  not  appeared  sooner  ?  The  Chancellor, 
then,  had  made  the  concession  only  in  the  hope  of  ob- 
taining a  promise  of  neutrality  from  England?  The 
promise  having  escaped  him,  he  discreetly  withdrew. 
As  for  the  matter  of  a  "periodic  exchange  of  information," 
it  was  rendered  improbable,  if  not  impossible,  first  by  a 
declaration  of  the  Emperor  to  the  Ambassador  of  England 
to  the  effect  that  he  would  never  permit  an  arrangement 
limiting  the  development  of  his  fleet  and  then  by  one  of 
the  Chancellor's  speeches  (March  30)  interpreting  the 
imperial  idea.  ' '  Who  would  accept, ' '  said  Mr.  Bethmann- 
Hollweg,  "the  idea  of  weakening  his  means  of  defence 
without  being  absolutely  certain  that  his  neighbour  was 
not  secretly  exceeding  the  proportion  allotted  him  by 
the  treaty?"  It  is  not  hard  to  recognize,  from  such  a 
tone,  the  suspicious  temper  of  a  State  which  being  quite 
resolved  to  disregard  its  own  engagements  whenever 
there  was  any  'advantage  in  doing  so,  was  unable 
to  place  any  confidence  in  the  good  faith  of  others, 
especially  when  doing  so  would  thwart  its  ambitions. 
The  negotiations  were  singularly  embarrassed  by  this 
attitude. 

There  was  perseverance,  however,  on  the  English  side. 
.  .  .  The  Kaiser  came  to  London  to  attend  the  inaugura- 
tion of  the  monument  erected  in  memory  of  Queen  Vic- 
toria. He  was  well  received  and  acclaimed  by  the  crowd. 
A  few  weeks  later  the  Crown  Prince  arrived  to  take  part  in 
the  coronation  ceremonies  of  King  George;  in  the  pro- 
cession he  was  followed  by  a  delegation  of  white  cuir- 

8 


ii4  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

assiers,  of  blue  dragoons,  and  red  hussars  who  were  the 
object  of  a  popular  ovation. 

Everything  seemed  to  draw  the  two  countries  together 
and  Germany  was  flattering  herself  already,  no  doubt, 
on  winning  England's  friendship  without  sacrificing  any- 
thing of  her  pretensions,  when  suddenly,  the  Agadir  affair 
burst  out.  A  small  cruiser  with  the  symbolical  name  of 
the  Panther,  in  appearing  unexpectedly  off  the  coast  of 
Morocco,  reminded  people  that,  on  every  point  of  the 
globe  Germany  was  to  spring  into  the  circle  of  her  aston- 
ished neighbours  and  to  set  her  paw  on  the  morsel  which 
suited  her  with  the  remark:  "This  belongs  to  me  because 
I've  got  claws." 

The  support  given  us  on  this  occasion  by  England  will 
be  recollected.  By  her  action,  Germany  contested,  for 
the  second  time,  England's  right  to  sign  agreements  with 
a  third  Power  or  to  make  arrangements  which  did  not 
take  into  account  the  extent  of  her  appetite.  The  speech 
of  Lloyd  George  (July,  1911),  and  the  menace  of  the  British 
fleet  maintained  under  pressure  in  the  North  Sea  during 
the  months  of  August  and  September,  saved  us  from  war. 
.  .  .  Large  concessions  on  our  part  finally  appeased 
German  avidity.  The  atmosphere  recovered  its  serenity. 
England  manifested  her  goodwill,  by  expressing  the  hope 
that,  since  clouds  were  dissipated,  a  new  era  of  concord 
was  going  to  begin,  an  era  perhaps  favourable  to  the 
resumption  of  negotiations. 

At  the  commencement  of  1912,  Lord  Haldane,  persona 
grata  with  the  Emperor,  left  for  Berlin,  on  a  business  trip, 
that  is  to  say,  as  everyone  understood  on  a  semi-official 
mission  with  a  view  to  renewing  the  pourparlers.  Two 
days  before  Lord  Haldane's  arrival  in  the  capital  of  the 
Empire,  the  Kaiser  had  announced  at  the  opening  meet- 
ing of  the  Reichstag  considerable  increases  in  the  army 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  115 

and  navy  appropriations.  The  new  naval  law  added 
three  battle-ships  and  numerous  submarines  to  the  fleet, 
15,000  men  to  its  effectives  and  325,000,000  Mk.  to  the 
naval  budget.  The  conversation  between  Lord  Haldane 
and  the  Chancellor  was  rendered  difficult  by  this  preamble. 
Lord  Haldane,  however,  had  his  say  and  tried  to  make 
the  future  clear,  since  all  negotiations  regarding  the 
present  seemed  useless.  He  found  himself  opposed  by 
the  previous  demand,  namely,  that  Great  Britain  should 
sign  an  agreement  with  Germany  with  regard  to  her 
general  policy.  It  was  simply  a  renewal  of  the  proposi- 
tion of  1910.  Germany  was  trying  to  detach  England 
from  France  and  Russia;  following  that,  it  would  be  seen 
upon  what  basis  an  understanding  might  be  reached 
with  the  stipulation,  of  course,  that  the  German  naval 
programme  should  go  into  effect. 

On  this  occasion,  Sir  E.  Grey  pushed  the  spirit  of  con- 
ciliation to  the  point  of  considering  as  possible,  not  the 
reversal  of  British  policy,  but  an  explicit  agreement  with 
Germany,  which  he  had  thought  himself  unable  to  accept 
in  1910.  He  had  the  Cabinet's  sanction  to  the  following 
proposition:  The  two  Powers  being  naturally  desirous  of 
establishing  mutual  peace  and  friendship,  England  de- 
clares, as  far  as  she  is  concerned,  that  she  will  not  engage 
or  co-operate  in  an  aggression  against  Germany.  No 
aggressive  intention  against  Germany  is  either  the  prin- 
cipal or  secondary  object  of  the  groupings  or  ententes  to 
which  England  has  adhered  or  will  adhere  in  the  future. 
While  remaining  faithful  to  the  Triple  Entente,  England, 
therefore,  was  ready  to  sign  a  formal  declaration  to  the 
effect  that  the  Triple  Entente  was  pacific.  Germany 
refused  to  agree;  she  wanted  more;  she  desired  the 
neutrality  of  England  in  the  conflict  which  she  had,  no 
doubt,  already  resolved  upon.  It  was  this  same  attempt 
to  secure  English  neutrality,  that  Germany  was  to  renew, 


n6  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

in  extremis,  with  Sir  E.  Grey,  on  July  29,  1914  ... 
going  so  far  as  to  make  an  abject  proposal,  the  result  of 
which  would  have  meant  nothing  less  than  the  dishonour 
of  England. ' 

It  remained  for  England,  while  rigorously  applying 
the  principle  of  the  "double  standard,"  to  prove,  under 
all  circumstances  her  desire  to  maintain  by  force  of  good- 
will and  conciliatory  mediation,  the  precarious  balance 
of  power  of  Europe  in  arms.  In  1912,  Mr.  Winston 
Churchill,  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty,  in  presenting  the 
naval  budget  to  the  House  of  Commons,  declared  himself 
ready  to  inaugurate,  if  Germany  were  willing,  what  he 
called  the  "naval  holiday."  Let  any  year  whatsoever 
be  chosen,  it  would  be  enough  for  Germany  to  cease  build- 
ing during  a  certain  length  of  time,  to  determine  the  imme- 
diate suspension  in  the  building  of  a  corresponding  portion 
— representing  double  the  number  of  units — in  the  English 
navy.  The  same  proposition  was  renewed  in  1913 — 
without  result. 

Meanwhile  the  Italo-Turkish  conflict,  and  then  the 
Balkan  War  broke  out.  Europe  was  living  on  a  volcano. 
Sir  E.  Grey  multiplied  his  efforts  untiringly  to  keep  the 
great  nations  in  constant  touch  and  to  obtain  from  them 
united  decisions,  without  distinction  of  Alliances  or 
Ententes.  In  his  speeches  in  Parliament,  he  explained 
the  main  terms  of  his  policy:  thus,  as  early  as  March  13, 

1  The  semi-official  Gazette  of  Northern  Germany,  published  (July,  1915. 
V.  Le  Temps  du  21  Juillet)  the  text  of  the  agreement  which  Germany 
proposed  to  Lord  Haldane  in  1912.  It  is  the  confirmation  of  the  cynical 
attempt  to  entangle  England  in  a  veritable  complicity.  Germany  proposed : 
If  one  of  the  high  contracting  parties  is  drawn  into  war  against  one  or 
several  Powers  and  if  it  cannot  be  established  which  one  was  the  aggressor, 
the  other  party  will  observe  towards  it,  at  least  a  benevolent  neutrality.  .  .  . 

England  knew  what  she  had  to  expect  (s'nce  the  revelations  about  the 
falsification  of  the  Ems  dispatch  and  the  manoeuvres  of  Bismarck  regarding 
Benedetti)  concerning  the  competency  of  Germany  to  dissimulate  her 
aggressions. 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  117 

1911:  "We  have  the  strongest  desire  to  see  those  who 
are  our  friends  on  good  terms  with  all  the  Powers;  we 
regard  such  good  relations  with  satisfaction  and  without 
jealousy."  He  intervened  to  try  and  reconcile  Russia 
(one  of  the  Powers  of  the  Entente]  and  Austria  (one  of 
the  Powers  of  the  Alliance).  He  kept  up  cordial  relations 
with  Italy  who  might  serve  as  an  intermediary  between 
two  groups.  On  July  10,  1912,  he  expressed  himself  once 
more  as  follows:  "The  existence  of  separate  diplomatic 
groups  in  no  way  prevents  frankness  or  an  open  exchange 
of  views  when  questions  of  mutual  interest  arise;  if  this 
practice  is  established,  the  separate  diplomatic  groups 
will  not  necessarily  be  in  opposite  diplomatic  camps." 

Thanks  to  the  conciliatory  dispositions  of  France  and 
Russia,  England  was  thus  able,  during  the  troubled  period 
of  the  years  1912  and  1913,  to  play  felicitously  the  r61e 
of  peacemaker. 

When,  after  the  assassination  of  Sarajevo,  the  grave 
events  of  July,  1914,  took  place,  England  and  France 
being  less  directly  concerned  in  the  Austro-Serbian  quarrel, 
bent  all  their  efforts  towards  the  maintenance  of  peace. 

England  especially,  who  was  not  bound  by  any  alliance, 
was  well  suited,  even  to  the  last,  for  making  an  effort  to 
avert  peril.  She  devoted  herself  to  the  task  with  a  dili- 
gence, energy,  and  patience  which  would  have  triumphed, 
had  they  not  come  into  collision,  in  the  German  camp, 
with  a  cynical  purpose  long  formed.  It  is  enough  to 
recall  briefly  the  supreme  efforts  of  Sir  E.  Grey. 

On  July  23d,  Austria  sent  her  ultimatum  to  Servia, 
exacting  a  reply  within  forty-eight  hours.  During  this 
short  interval  of  forty-eight  hours,  England  made  three 
attempts  to  secure  peace.  1st,  she  insisted  at  Vienna, 
in  concert  with  Russia,  to  have  the  time  extended.  She 
asked  Berlin  to  join  her  in  her  earnest  entreaties.  All 


u8  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

that  Berlin  consented  to  do  was  to  forward  the  English 
request  to  the  Ballplatz.  2d,  she  proposed  to  France, 
Germany,  and  Italy  to  unite  with  her  with  a  view  to  media- 
tion between  Austria  and  Russia.  France  and  Italy 
accepted ;  Russia  declared  herself  ready  to  accept  welcome 
intervention.  Germany  declared  that  she  would  wait 
and  see  whether  the  nature  of  the  relations  between 
Austria  and  Russia  rendered  intervention  necessary 
(let  us  not  forget  that  the  time  limit  was  forty-eight 
hours).  3d,  the  English  representative  at  Belgrade 
received  the  mission,  along  with  the  French  and  Russian 
representatives  to  advise  Servia  to  go  as  far  as  possible 
in  her  concessions. 

Meanwhile  the  forty-eight  hours  had  almost  spent 
themselves.  Two  hours  before  the  fatal  moment,  a  copy 
of  the  Servian  reply  reached  the  Foreign  Office.  It  was, 
as  is  well  known,  remarkably  subdued  and  conciliatory. 
Sir  E.  Grey  immediately  asked  Berlin  to  urge  Vienna 
to  declare  herself  satisfied.  Once  more  Berlin  was  con- 
tent to  communicate  the  English  demand  to  her  ally. 

The  Austro-Servian  conflict  was,  then,  inevitable,  and 
Russia  had  signified  that  she  would  not  remain  indifferent. 
Sir  E.  Grey  proposed  a  Conference  of  the  Powers  not 
directly  interested:  England,  France,  Germany,  and 
Italy.  Germany  refused  without  explanation.  On  the 
28th  the  Austrians  commenced  the  bombardment  of 
Belgrade.  On  the  29th,  Russia  decreed  partial  mobili- 
zation. Sir  E.  Grey,  after  an  exchange  of  views  with 
Russia,  who  even  then  showed  herself  ready  to  go  to 
any  extreme  to  avoid  the  irreparable,  telegraphed  to 
Berlin  asking  Germany  to  designate  any  mode  of  media- 
tion whatsoever  which  would  be  more  acceptable  than 
the  proposed  Conference.  This  appeal  received  a  strange 
reply. 

To  the  disinterested  and  generously  humane  proposal 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  119 

of  England,  Germany  replied  with  the  cynical  offer  of 
the  bargain  of  which  I  have  spoken.  This  bargain  was 
destined  to  transform  a  rival  into  an  accomplice,  until 
the  time  came  to  crush  her  in  turn.  England  was  to 
assist  in  the  struggle  as  a  spectator  under  the  guarantee 
that  Germany  would  not  lay  hands  on  Holland  (that  is 
to  say  would  be  satisfied  with  the  economic  empire  of 
this  country,  without  absorbing  it)  and  would  not  annex 
Belgium  (with  the  same  sous-entendu  concerning  the  means 
of  communication  and  the  ports — and  all  of  this  on 
condition  that  Belgium  deliver  passage  to  the  German 
armies),  and  finally,  would  not  seize  any  territory  in 
France,  her  colonies  alone  being  destined  to  constitute 
the  price  of  victory.1 

1  V.  No.  85  of  the  English  Blue  Book: 
SIR  E.  GOSCHEN,  BRITISH  AMBASSADOR  AT  BERLIN  TO  SIR  EDWARD  GREY 

(Received  July  2gth) 
Telegraphic.  BERLIN,  July  29,  1914. 

I  was  asked  to  call  upon  the  Chancellor  tonight.  His  Excellency  had 
just  returned  from  Potsdam. 

He  said  that  should  Austria  be  attacked  by  Russia,  a  European  confla- 
gration might,  he  feared,  become  inevitable,  owing  to  Germany's  obliga- 
tions as  Austria's  ally,  in  spite  of  his  continued  efforts  to  maintain  peace. 
He  then  proceeded  to  make  the  following  strong  bid  for  British  neutrality. 
He  said  that  it  was  clear,  so  far  as  he  was  able  to  judge  the  main  principle 
which  governed  British  policy  that  Great  Britain  would  never  stand  by 
and  allow  France  to  be  crushed  in  any  conflict  there  might  be.  That, 
however,  was  not  the  object  at  which  Germany  aimed.  Provided  that 
neutrality  of  Great  Britain  were  certain,  every  assurance  would  be  given 
to  the  British  Government  that  the  Imperial  Government  aimed  at  no 
territorial  acquisition  at  the  expense  of  France  should  they  prove  victori- 
ous in  any  war  which  might  ensue. 

I  questioned  his  Excellency  about  the  French  colonies,  and  he  said  that 
he  was  unable  to  give  a  similar  undertaking  in  that  respect.  As  regards 
Holland,  however,  his  Excellency  said  that  so  long  as  Germany's  adver- 
saries respected  the  integrity  and  neutrality  of  the  Netherlands,  Germany 
was  ready  to  give  his  Majesty's  Government  an  assurance  that  she  would 
do  likewise.  It  depended  upon  the  action  of  France  what  operations 
Germany  might  be  forced  to  enter  upon  in  Belgium,  but  when  the  war  was 


120  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

The  English  Government  could  no  longer  have  any 
doubt  as  to  the  intentions  of  Germany.  Nevertheless, 
its  inclination  for  peace  led  it  to  stand  aloof  from  the 
conflict  (at  the  risk  of  causing  France  the  cruel  uncer- 
tainty which  she  experienced  from  July  29th  to  August 
4th),  as  long  as  her  vital  interests  were  not  threatened, 
that  is  to  say,  until  the  violation  of  the  neutrality  of 
Belgium.  Our  Ambassador  at  London  urged  Sir  E.  Grey 
to  declare  himself  in  favour  of  the  Franco-Russian  cause, 
setting  forth  that  this  single  step  would  no  doubt  be  suffi- 
cient to  restrain  Germany.1  Sir  E.  Grey  replied  that  he 
had  distinctly  declared  to  the  German  Ambassador  that 
England  by  no  means  promised  to  remain  neutral;  but 
that  he  could  do  no  more;  that  the  events  would  deter- 
mine the  attitude  of  the  English  people  and  its  Govern- 
ment. A  step  undertaken  by  the  President  of  the 
Republic  with  the  English  Ambassador  at  Paris,  had  no 

over,  Belgian  integrity  would  be  respected  if  she  had  not  sided  against 
Germany. 

His  Excellency  ended  by  saying  that  ever  since  he  had  been  Chancellor 
the  object  of  his  policy  had  been,  as  you  were  aware,  to  bring  about  an 
understanding  with  England;  he  trusted  that  these  assurances  might  form 
the  basis  of  that  understanding  which  he  so  much  desired.  He  had  in 
mind  a  general  neutrality  agreement  between  England  and  Germany, 
though  it  was  of  course  at  the  present  moment  too  early  to  discuss  details, 
and  an  assurance  of  British  neutrality  in  the  conflict  which  present  crisis 
might  possibly  produce,  would  enable  him  to  look  forward  to  realization 
of  his  desire. 

In  reply  to  his  Excellency's  enquiry  how  I  thought  his  request  would 
appeal  to  you,  I  said  that  I  did  not  think  it  probable  that  at  this  stage  of 
events  you  would  care  to  bind  yourself  to  any  course  of  action  and  that  I 
was  of  opinion  that  you  would  desire  to  retain  full  liberty.  .  .  . 

No.  101 

His  Majesty's  Government  cannot  for  a  moment  entertain  the  Chan- 
cellor's proposal  that  they  should  bind  themselves  to  neutrality  on  such 
terms. 

What  he  asks  us  in  effect  is  to  engage  to  stand  by  while  French  colonies 

1  July  agth.     Blue  Book,  piece  87. 


What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace  121 

more  success  than  the  preceding.1  Finally  a  personal 
letter  from  M.  Poincare  to  the  King  of  England  received 
the  same  evasive  reply. 2 

On  August  ist,  the  day  of  Germany's  declaration  of 
war  against  France,  England  had  not  given  any  assurance 
that  she  would  place  herself  on  our  side.  Our  Atlantic 
fleet,  reduced  to  a  few  units  since  the  adoption  of  the  plan 
of  concentration  in  the  Mediterranean,  steered  home  for 
the  Straits  of  Dover  at  the  risk  of  finding  itself  alone  and 
face  to  face  with  the  immense  German  fleet. 

It  was  not  until  the  second  of  August  that  Sir  E.  Grey 
announced  that  by  reason  of  the  convention  relating  to 
the  two  fleets,  the  English  navy  would  not  permit  an 
attack  against  our  coasts.  The  Royal  Government, 
however,  would  make  no  further  engagements.  Finally 
the  invasion  of  Belgium  dealt  English  opinion  the  blow 
which  rendered  any  further  abstention  out  of  the  question. 

are  taken  and  France  is  beaten  so  long  as  Germany  does  not  take  French 
territory  as  distinct  from  the  colonies. 

From  the  material  point  of  view  such  a  proposal  is  unacceptable,  for 
France,  without  further  territory  in  Europe  being  taken  from  her,  could 
be  so  crushed  as  to  lose  her  position  as  a  Great  Power,  and  become  subor- 
dinate to  German  policy. 

Altogether  apart  from  that,  it  would  be  a  disgrace  for  us  to  make  this 
bargain  with  Germany  at  the  expense  of  France,  a  disgrace  from  which 
the  good  name  of  this  country  would  never  recover. 

The  Chancellor  also  in  effect  asks  us  to  bargain  away  whatever  obliga- 
tion or  interest  we  have  as  regards  the  neutrality  of  Belgium.  We  could 
not  entertain  that  bargain  either.  .  .  . 

.  .  .  We  must  preserve  our  full  freedom  to  act  as  circumstances  may 
seem  to  us  to  require  in  any  such  unfavourable  and  regrettable  development 
of  the  present  crisis  as  the  Chancellor  contemplates. 

.  .  .  And  I  will  say  this:  "If  the  peace  of  Europe  can  be  preserved  and 
the  present  crisis  safely  passed,  my  own  endeavour  will  be  to  promote 
some  arrangement  to  which  Germany  could  be  a  party,  by  which  she  could 
be  assured  that  no  aggressive  or  hostile  policy  would  be  pursued  against 
her  or  her  Allies  by  France,  Russia,  and  ourselves,  jointly  or  separately.  .  ." 

1  July  3oth.    Blue  Book,  piece  99. 

*  July  3 1  st.     Second  Blue  Book. 


122  What  England  Did  to  Maintain  Peace 

England  sent  an  ultimatum  to  Berlin,  and,  after  the 
historic  interview  during  which  the  Chancellor  von  Beth- 
mann-Hollweg  termed  the  treaty  of  1839  a  "scrap  of 
paper,"  England  declared  war. 

From  the  preceding  facts  it  results  that  England  being 
animated  with  a  sincere  desire  for  peace,  kept  up  negotia- 
tions with  Germany  for  ten  years,  giving  her  assurance 
by  means  of  formal  declarations  and  proving  by  acts  that 
no  coalition  existed  against  the  German  Empire  and  that 
no  "encircling  process"  was  being  put  into  effect  against 
it.  But  Germany  thirsted  for  new  riches  and  for  new 
lands:  by  the  formidable  increase  of  her  army,  by  the 
construction  of  a  fleet  growing  every  year  more  powerful, 
by  the  diffusion  among  her  people  of  the  horrible  doctrine 
of  force,  she  was  getting  ready  to  lay  brutal  hold  on  the 
supremacy  of  Europe  and  the  Empire  of  the  world.  In 
presence  of  this  grim  design  of  aggrandizement  and  of 
domination,  without  any  consideration  of  right,  justice, 
or  humanity,  of  what  possible  avail  were  pacific  advances, 
concessions,  or  assurances  of  goodwill? 

Tardily,  the  Powers  of  the  Triple  Entente  resolved  to 
forearm  against  the  assaults  of  force.  While  it  is  true 
that  they  have  placed  themselves  in  a  certain  state  of 
inferiority,  on  the  other  hand,  they  have  prepared  by 
their  attachment  to  concord,  equity,  and  peace,  a  brighter 
future  for  Europe.  If  the  United  States  join  them,  as 
one  may  hope,  they  will  have  made  possible  the  reign  of 
better  relations  and  of  higher  justice  in  the  world. 


CHAPTER  VI 
England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

ENGLAND  laboured  for  peace  as  long  as  there  was 
a  ray  of  hope  that  the  conflict  might  be  decided 
peacefully;  she  rose  valiant  and  inflexible  to  defend 
her  homes  and  ideals  when  it  appeared  that  the  enterprises 
of  force  were  no  longer  respectful  of  the  most  sacred  founda- 
tions of  human  justice.  In  her  attachment  to  peace  and  in 
her  determination  to  defend  herself  without  weakness  even 
to  the  end,  I  see  the  affirmation  of  the  noble  purpose  of 
a  great  people  •  proud  of  its  traditions  and  institutions 
which  it  knows,  are  its  honour  and  safeguard  and  which 
it  rightly  considers  as  essential  contributions  to  the  uni- 
versal work  of  civilization.  The  particular  product  of 
English  genius,  by  which  it  has  led  other  people  on  the 
highway  of  progress  and  thanks  to  which  it  has  sown  one 
of  those  seeds  of  moral  worth  destined  sooner  or  later  to 
spring  up  and  fructify  in  every  conscience,  is  the  creation 
of  Liberty.  First,  political  liberty,  without  which  the  air 
breathed  by  man  remains  heavy,  sterile,  and  ill-suited 
to  the  noble  engendering  of  ideas,  energies,  and  generous 
sentiments;  and  then  moral  liberty,  that  pure  growth  of 
the  heights,  the  crown  of  centuries  of  collective  effort: 
such  are  the  benefits  which  England  secured  for  herself. 
These  she  has  set  before  the  world.  And  she  is  determined 
to  defend  them  with  all  the  prowess  of  her  arms  and  all 
the  strength  of  her  heart. 

123 


124  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

English  liberty  was  for  ages  an  indigenous  product  of 
the  British  Isles,  favoured  in  its  growth  by  the  very  isola- 
tion of  the  nation,  an  unusual  extra-European  fruit  of 
particularly  advantageous  geographical  and  historical 
conditions.  For  many  a  decade  English  liberty  remained 
the  exclusive  privilege  of  an  insular  people,  jealous  of  their 
insularity.  But,  in  the  course  of  centuries,  the  idea  broad- 
ened and  became  humanized,  waxing  richer  with  the 
developments  which  it  had  provoked  in  foreign  con- 
sciences and  gathering,  through  reaction,  a  force  of  expan- 
sion which  it  did  not  possess  at  the  outset. 

At  least,  potentially,  English  liberty  was  already  in 
existence  when  the  great  intellectual  movement  of  the 
Renaissance  brought  to  it  the  vigour  and  breadth  of 
Hellenic  thought.  It  was  Plato's  Republic  that  partly 
inspired  the  visionary  Thomas  More  to  write  that  Utopia 
in  which  he  anticipated,  as  early  as  the  first  years  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  not  only  the  civil  and  political  guaran- 
tees of  liberty  but  the  economic,  intellectual,  and  social 
guarantees  as  well.  Protection  of  the  poor  against  the 
rich,  regulation  of  work,  public  health,  religious  tolerance, 
equal  justice,  education  for  all — such  are  the  measures 
or  principles  which  were  long  ago  laid  down  by  Thomas 
More  and  which  our  own  epoch  is  just  beginning  to  under- 
stand and  achieve.  What  a  noble  accent  there  is  in  the 
words  in  which  he  demands  for  all  the  light  of  leisure, 
so  that  all  may  have  the  opportunity  of  developing 
within  themselves  faculties  properly  human.1 

1  "For  whie  in  the  institution  of  that  weale  publique,  this  ende  is  onelye 
and  chiefly  pretended  and  mynded,  that  what  time  maye  possibly  be  spared 
from  the  necessarye  occupations  and  affayre  of  the  commonwealth,  all 
that  the  citizens  shoulde  withdrawe  from  the  bodely  service  to  the  free 
libertye  of  the  mind,  and  garnisshinge  of  the  same.  For  herein  they  sup- 
pose the  felicitye  of  this  liffe  to  consiste."  From  The  Seconde  booke  of 
Utopia,  translated  by  Ralphe  Robynson  (ed.  Rev.  J.  Lumby,  Cam.  Univ. 
Press,  1897). 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  125 

Wherefore  in  the  institutions  of  the  Republic,  the  object 
that  should  be  especially  sought  after  and  desired  is  that  all 
the  time  the  citizens  can  economize  from  the  necessary  oc- 
cupations and  affairs  of  the  commonwealth,  should  be 
wrested  from  bodily  tasks  and  consecrated  to  the  adornment 
and  liberation  of  their  minds. 


Then,  it  was  the  movement  of  Puritanism  which, 
although  tainted  in  certain  quarters  with  authoritative 
narrowness,  nevertheless,  through  its  revolt  against  the 
tyranny  of  the  Stuarts,  communicated  a  powerful  impulse 
to  individualism  and  independence.  Milton  became 
its  mouthpiece.  In  the  fiery  pamphlets,  which  as  historio- 
grapher of  Cromwell  he  published  in  the  name  of  the 
English  people,  one  feels  the  warm  thrill  of  the  revolution- 
ist and  the  noble  enthusiasm  of  the  humanist  who  has 
been  nurtured  in  the  liberty  of  antiquity.  Not  even  in 
modern  times  have  juster  words  and  bolder  words  been 
written  to  claim  the  liberty  of  the  press. 

And  though  all  the  winds  of  doctrine  were  let  loose  to  play 
upon  the  earth,  so  truth  be  in  the  field,  we  do  injuriously  by 
licensing  and  prohibiting  to  misdoubt  her  strength.  Let  her 
and  falsehood  grapple ;  who  ever  knew  Truth  put  to  the  worse 
in  a  free  and  open  encounter.  .  .  .  When  a  man  hath  been 
labouring  the  hardest  labour  in  the  deep  mines  of  knowledge, 
hath  furnished  out  his  finding  in  all  their  equipage,  drawn 
forth  his  reasons  as  it  were  a  battle  ranged,  scattered  and 
defeated  all  objections  in  his  way,  calls  out  his  adversary 
into  the  plain,  offers  him  the  advantage  of  wind  and  sun, 
if  he  please,  only  that  he  may  try  the  matter  by  dint  of 
argument;  for  his  opponents  then  to  skulk,  to  lay  am- 
bushments,  to  keep  a  narrow  bridge  of  licensing  where 
the  challenger  should  pass,  though  it  be  valour  enough  in 
soldiership,  is  but  weakness  and  cowardice  in  the  wars  of 
Truth. 


126  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

The  Puritans,  who  reckoned  among  them  the  sect  of 
the  "Levellers,"  were  the  first  to  include,  in  the  concrete 
claims  of  the  people,  the  civil  and  political  equality  of 
all  before  the  Judgment  of  God.  To  them  historians 
have  been  able  to  trace,  in  full  justice,  the  origin  of  the 
democratic  idea. 

In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  Hobbes 
and  Locke  set  forth  the  doctrine  of  the  "social  contract" 
from  which  Rousseau  was  to  draw  great  profit  and  which, 
through  him,  was  destined  to  become  the  credo  of  the 
French  Revolution.  No  doubt,  French  rationalism  had 
to  clarify  the  ideas  of  liberty  and  fire  them  with  its  elan 
and  enthusiasm,  before  they  could  be  carried  into  the 
world  to  become  the  soul  of  whatever  nations  were  cap- 
able of  rising  to  this  height  of  idealism.  To  the  French 
Revolution  the  world  owes  the  application  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  liberty  to  the  social  problem  and  to  the  problem 
of  nationalities.  But  the  Revolution  itself  recognized 
its  debt  to  England.  Indeed  Montesquieu  and  Rousseau 
were  not  the  only  ones  to  render  homage  to  their 
British  precursors;  a  whole  party,  in  the  Constituante 
and  in  the  Legislative,  declared  itself  indebted  to  the 
English  Constitution. 

The  French  Revolution,  acting  by  counter-shock  on 
English  consciences,  has,  little  by  little,  during  the  course 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  determined  the  evolution  of 
the  earlier  conception  of  liberty.  By  a  broadening  move- 
ment, conformable,  no  doubt,  to  its  particular  essence, 
but  accelerated  by  the  influence  of  our  rationalism,  English 
liberty  has  become  democratic  and  finally  socialistic. 
Today  the  thought  of  the  French  and  English  is  in  harmony 
both  as  to  principles  and  applications.  Therefore  they 
are  able  to  unite  and  raise  a  barrier  against  the  insufferable 
claims  of  the  German  idea,  which,  under  cover  of  an  atro- 
cious war  not  only  upon  armies  but  also  upon  nations, 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  127 

aims  at  nothing  less  than  the  submission  of  Europe  to 
the  yoke  of  German  militarism  and  German  "state-ism." 

The  English  and  French  humanists  of  the  Renaissance, 
and  the  French  and  English  philosophers  of  the  eighteenth 
century  expressed  in  all  its  breadth  the  problem  of  liberty. 
They  were  careful  not  to  separate  free  thought  and  free 
institutions.  The  citizen  has  a  right  to  independence 
and  to  the  guarantee  of  just  and  equal  laws,  so  that  man 
may  progress  in  the  conquest  of  truth.  In  the  course  of 
the  eighteenth  century,  the  sceculum  rationalisticum  which 
witnessed  the  admirable  rise  of  both  natural  and  moral 
sciences,  liberty  and  truth  formed  an  indissoluble  alli- 
ance. Under  the  new  order,  truth  participated  in  the 
supple  and  undulated  movement  of  liberty:  truth  was 
no  longer  absolute  and  fixed,  but  relative  and  continually 
in  a  state  of  becoming.  It  was  considered  to  be  the  pro- 
duct of  the  thinkers  of  all  times  and  of  all  countries,  who 
had  brought  and  were  still  continuing  to  bring  their 
contribution  to  the  sum  total.  Hence  arose  the  historical 
and  cosmopolitan  conception  of  the  moral  sciences. 

Germany,  who  ranked  at  that  time  among  the  intel- 
lectual forces  of  Europe,  had  her  part  in  the  diffusion  of 
this  conception,  the  most  fruitful  of  all  those  which  fav- 
oured the  expansion  of  modern  thought.  Goethe,  finding 
himself  on  common  ground  with  the  French  and  English 
humanists  and  philosophers,  borrowed  from  them  the 
word  "culture"  to  designate  an  effort  to  assimilate  the 
best  of  universal  thought,  which  was  in  turn  to  serve  as 
the  starting-point  of  a  new  effort,  directed  by  all  those 
who  think  towards  a  new  stage  of  truth.  The  diversity 
of  talents,  of  civilizations,  and  of  races  is,  in  this  concep- 
tion, a  favourable  element  of  progress.  The  chances  of 
error  counterbalance  each  other;  fruitful  ideas  are  gener- 
ated more  plentifully  in  different  environments  formed 


128  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

severally  according  to  the  law  of  their  history,  traditions, 
and  national  temperament.  ' '  Culture ' '  was  thus  a  human- 
izing force  and  a  promise  of  peace. 

England  and  France  have  remained  true  to  this  culture. 
Germany  abjured  it  on  the  day  when  she  set  her  face 
against  the  great  thought  of  Goethe,  or  faintly  invoked 
it  only  under  the  cloak  of  hypocrisy.  She  renounced 
"culture"  for  Kultur,  a  narrow  and  brutally  German  idea 
which,  to  serve  the  plunder-plan  of  Prussianized  Germany, 
exalts  mechanism,  passive  obedience,  and  the  horrible 
doctrine  of  force. 

Kultur,  the  idealization  of  the  most  selfish  and  material- 
istic elements  of  the  German  character  has  become  the 
credo  of  aggression  and  domination.  If  Kultur  were  to 
triumph,  only  an  intolerable  uniformity  would  survive 
the  ruins  of  humanism  and  liberty.  Individuals  and 
peoples  would  be  forced  under  the  constraint  of  an  arid 
scientific  method  (strengwissenschaftliche  Methode)  which 
finds  its  highest  expression  in  scientific  war.  Under  the 
pressure  of  force  (Faustrecht) ,  all  spontaneous  elan,  all 
beauty,  all  dignity  would  be  stifled.  The  Germans  would 
bring  about  the  unification  of  the  world  by  the  whipping- 
thong  of  the  Feldwebel  and  by  the  flogging-rod  of  the  Schul- 
lehrer.  As  for  us,  through  the  integral  application  of 
liberty,  we  wish  to  live  and  let  live,  to  permit  the  world 
to  achieve  its  union  in  variety  and  diversity  through  the 
co-operation  of  national  energies  and  under  the  protec- 
tion of  particular  traditions  and  universal  reason.  Our 
opponents  would  impose  their  Kultur  on  all ;  we  are  defend- 
ing Culture  as  it  was  created  by  the  Latins  and  Anglo- 
Saxons,  as  it  was  understood  by  Goethe,  as  it  is  practiced 
in  our  universities  and  in  the  universities  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge,  and  as  it  is  set  forth  by  French  and  English 
writers. 

Through  culture,  each  ethnic  group,  while  remaining 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  129 

attached  to  the  traditions  bequeathed  by  its  ancestors 
and  to  the  principles  imposed  by  its  history,  profits  from 
the  growing  treasure  of  human  wisdom.  Thus  develops 
a  civilization,  both  individual  and  universal,  that  is 
marked  by  the  distinctive  signs  proper  to  each  national 
centre  and  that  is  enriched  by  the  conquests  of  reason. 
And  thus  is  rendered  more  precise  the  great  hope  of 
tomorrow — a  society  of  nations  that  is  consistent  with  the 
highest  type  of  the  society  of  individuals,  built  up  of 
spontaneity  and  liberty,  under  the  unifying  action  of  a 
few  great  currents  of  thought  operating  in  common. 

Kultur  is  the  exclusive  and  intolerant  notion  of  a  method 
of  life,  of  a  Sittlichkeit,  conceived  by  the  German  mind 
within  the  limits  of  German  science  and  German  militarism 
which  a  people  of  chemists,  foremen,  and  corporals  wish 
to  impose  upon  the  world  for  the  world's  happiness.  This 
people,  born  for  passive  obedience,  accustomed  to  sub- 
mission to  an  autocratic  regime  and  a  hierarchy  of  castes 
and  classes,  raised  too  quickly  to  a  material  prosperity 
founded  on  mechanism  and  bureaucracy,  nourishes  the 
arrogant  idea  of  bending  all  men  to  its  soulless  discipline 
...  by  force.  Human  life  is  reduced  to  an  ambition 
of  acquisitiveness  and  of  self-gratification,  which  has  no 
aim  outside  itself.  This  ambition  must  needs  utterly 
efface  the  original  discoveries  of  noble  civilizations,  the 
aspirations  which  idealistic  races  have  placed  higher  than 
matter,  the  generous  dreams  which  the  great  epochs  of 
history  have  pursued,  maladroitly  at  times,  but  without 
debasement.  Kultur  makes  no  distinction  between  the 
means  and  the  end,  attaching  itself  to  a  sort  of  illuminism 
directed  the  wrong  way,  which  exalts  scientific  precision, 
technical  skill,  and  riches  to  the  pinnacle  of  human  effort 
after  having  brutally  overthrown  art,  reason,  and  con- 
science. Kultur  is  the  sinister  fanaticism  of  power  and 
force, — treaties  trampled  under  foot,  nations  assaulted 


130  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

and  crucified,  humanity's  laws  contemned  or  violated, 
the  creations  of  genius  mutilated  or  destroyed.  Upon 
these  ruins  is  to  be  established  the  reign  of  Deutschtum. 
The  beneficent  cosmopolitanism  towards  which  the  world 
was  slowly  progressing  through  sympathies,  alliances, 
arbitrage,  reciprocal  concessions,  mutual  sacrifice  of 
desires  in  the  expansion  of  talents  and  national  ideals, 
must  needs  yield  to  a  malevolent  cosmopolitanism,  sprung 
up  like  pestilence  in  the  wake  of  destruction  and  massacre. 

Germany  [declares  Mr.  Ostwald,  chemist  and  metaphysi- 
cian], on  the  morrow  of  victory,  will  establish  the  confedera- 
tion of  the  States  of  Europe,  under  her  protection  and 
supremacy.  .  .  .  Germans  have  discovered  the  great  factor  of 
the  civilization  of  the  future,  the  factor  of  organization.  .  .  . 
We  are  waging  war  only  for  the  purpose  of  conducting  France, 
England,  and  Russia,  from  the  stage  of  a  horde,  in  which  they 
still  exist,  to  the  stage  of  an  organized  collectivity,  which  is  the 
goal  of  the  social  effort  of  humanity.  I  am  a  pacifist  and  an 
internationalist:  the  peace  and  union  of  nations  will  come 
into  existence  only  through  the  predominance  of  Germany, 
destined  to  become  the  intellectual  centre  of  gravity  of  the 
universe. 


If,  in  these  predictions,  one  overlooks  the  naive  inso- 
lence of  Teutonic  infatuations,  it  still  remains  true  that 
the  principle  which  the  intellectual  leaders  of  Germany 
knowingly  seek  to  destroy  is  the  principle  of  liberty, — 
the  conquest  which  the  practical  genius  of  England  and 
the  philosophical  genius  of  France  have  achieved  in  the 
course  of  long  centuries  of  history.  Upon  the  principle 
of  liberty  reposes  the  independence  of  individuals  within 
the  State  organism  as  well  as  the  independence  of  nations 
within  the  society  of  States.  Liberty,  no  doubt,  is  not 
enough  in  itself.  Although  liberty  assures  the  full  ex- 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  131 

pansion  of  the  facilities,  the  genial  fruition  of  the  supreme 
force  of  personality  in  the  joy  of  independence  and  dignity 
of  self-command,  yet  liberty  also  may  cause  fancy  to 
degenerate  into  caprice;  and  independence  into  dispersion 
and  incoherence.  Liberty  must  be  tempered  by  disci- 
pline, limited  by  order,  rendered  fecund  by  co-operation. 
The  great  laws  which  govern  human  activity  are  never 
simple,  nor  do  they  act  alone.  They  influence  each  other 
reciprocally,  so  that  alternately,  through  the  acceleration 
and  neutralization  of  their  effects,  is  produced  an  equi- 
librium favourable  to  what  one  may  consider  for  a  time  as 
rectitude  and  truth.  All  fruitful  action,  all  justice,  all- 
happiness,  all  progress  which  is  not  the  counterfeit  of  a 
retrogression,  are  the  result  of  a  compromise,  of  the  com- 
bination of  divergent  and  often  opposed  principles. 
Such  is  the  price  of  human  wisdom. 

Now  this  is  a  truth  which,  owing  to  the  collective  aber- 
ration where  Germany  suffered  herself  to  drift,  a  German 
brain  is  not  permitted  to  conceive.  The  power  of  the 
Germans  is  born  of  force;  their  productivity  is  born  of 
mechanism;  their  prosperity,  such  as  it  is — I  mean  that 
prosperity  which  is  estimated  according  to  quantity  and 
not  quality — is  born  of  organization ;  they  establish  force, 
mechanism,  and  organization  as  absolute  principles, 
which  justify  in  their  eyes  an  inhuman  aggression.  We 
do  not  misappreciate  these  principles;  we  give  them  their 
place,  through  necessity  or  through  just  admission  of  their 
value;  we  were  ready,  indeed,  if  Germany  had  cared  to 
cease  brandishing  force  as  a  menace,  to  learn  from  her 
lessons  of  patience  and  of  economy  in  work.  But  we 
could  not  admit  the  imperative  and  excessive  doctrine  of 
machine-made  materialism  which  resulted  in  the  worship 
of  force  and  in  the  negation  of  liberty.  In  our  eyes  the 
right  of  force  does  not  outweigh  the  force  of  right,  mechan- 
ism does  not  excel  the  supple  play  of  intellectual  and 


132  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

moral  activity,  nor  organization,  the  free  development 
of  individuality. 

England  and  France,  having  had  the  glory  of  creating 
a  conception  of  life  nobly  national  and  highly  humane, 
cannot  abandon  without  self-stultification  the  collective 
work  of  the  generations  of  their  race.  Nor  will  they  do 
so,  since  to  this  work  is  attached  their  deepest  emotions, 
their  honour,  and  their  conscience. 

The  sincerity  and  breadth  of  their  ideal  permit  them 
to  understand  its  variations  among  peoples  who  have  the 
same  lofty  aims.  Not  being  exclusive,  they  are  capable 
of  sympathy.  Not  being  deluded  by  self-idolatry,  they 
can  respect  in  others  national  aspirations  founded  on 
race-characteristics,  traditions,  and  history.  Whatever 
be  the  injustices  or  errors  which  they  may  have  committed 
in  the  past,  they  are  still  sufficiently  frank  to  recognize 
these  errors  and  generous  enough  to  repair  these  injustices. 
They  are  striving  to  create  an  era  of  right,  by  extending 
to  the  relations  between  peoples  the  precepts  and  guaran- 
tees which  govern  the  relations  between  individuals. 
Artisans  of  progress  themselves,  they  are  seeking  to  apply 
to  the  international  regime — avoiding  any  approach  to 
an  Utopia — what  is  concrete  and  realizable  in  the  moral 
ideal.  Thus  on  common  ground  they  have  met  to  defend 
the  existence  and  individualism  of  peoples  against  the 
German  attempt  at  forcible  levelling  by  the  sword  and  by 
Kultur. 

For  England  and  for  France  the  essential  principle  at 
stake  in  the  struggle  is  the  principle  of  liberty.  Liberty 
of  the  individual,  threatened  by  militarism,  scientific 
mechanism,  political  despotism  and  administrative  ty- 
ranny; liberty  of  nations,  threatened  by  the  reign  of  war, 
the  system  of  intimidation  and  terror,  the  ambitions  and 
pretentions  of  Kultur:  such  are  the  great  principles  for 
which  they  are  fighting,  such  are  the  universal  benefits 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  133 

they  wish  to  safeguard;  theirs  is  a  contest  for  man's  right 
to  think,  and  feel,  and  understand  life  according  to  the 
generous  dictates  of  his  heart  and  reason, — a  contest  for 
the  triumph  of  moral  liberty. 

England  developed,  before  France,  the  institutions 
which  guarantee  to  the  citizen  the  independence  of  his 
person  and  his  opinions,  equal  justice  and  self-government. 
She  is  the  Mother  of  Liberty.  We  shall  better  under- 
stand the  ideal  which  she  is  upholding  today  by  force 
of  arms,  if  we  trace  its  genesis  and  determine  its  signifi- 
cance in  the  light  of  history. 

England  is  the  only  country  in  Europe  in  which,  as 
early  as  the  Middle  Ages,  the  subjects  of  the  Crown  were 
citizens,  protected  against  exaction  and  arbitrariness, 
associated  with  the  Government,  and  fixing  for  themselves 
the  financial  contribution  to  be  assessed  and  the  use  to 
which  it  was  to  be  put.  In  this  way,  among  them,  the 
spirit  of  liberty  developed  very  early  and  was  maintained 
with  a  constancy  and  moderation  which  links  their  name 
indissolubly  with  the  very  idea  of  government  of  the 
people,  by  the  people. 

It  was  her  privileged  geographical  situation  and  the 
particular  circumstances  of  her  history  that  permitted 
England  to  attain  so  early,  political  personality  and 
maturity  and  to  become  the  preceptor  of  other  nations. 
This  island  protected  by  the  natural  defence  of  the  ocean, 
became  inexpugnable  from  the  day  when  the  Normans 
had  accomplished  its  unification  and  organization.  From 
1066,  the  date  of  the  landing  of  William  the  Conqueror 
on  the  coast  of  Sussex  up  to  the  time  of  the  Camp  of 
Boulogne,  in  1804,  England  knew  no  threat  of  invasion. 
Everyone  recognizes  the  vanity  of  Napoleon's  attempt. 
This  immunity,  coupled  with  her  relatively  small  dimen- 
sions (for,  in  the  initial  period,  one  should  exclude 


134  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

Scotland  and  Ireland),  has  made  her  an  apt  field 
for  practicing  the  difficult  task  of  constructing  free 
government. 

Strictly  speaking  there  was  no  feudalism  in  England.1 
On  the  morrow  of  the  conquest,  William  I  was  the  sole 
master  of  the  country;  the  Barons  who  had  followed  the 
campaign  with  him  received  as  a  reward  for  their  services 
certain  "domains"  which  could  never  be  transformed 
into  "States."  If  one  of  these  great  vassals  appeared  to 
seek  independence,  the  royal  armies  had  but  little  distance 
to  cover  before  finding  themselves  under  the  walls  of 
his  castle.  These  Barons,  therefore,  were  little  inclined 
to  play  the  part  of  small  potentates.  To  hold  in  check 
the  royal  power  they  combined  one  with  another  and 
opposed  the  united  forces  of  their  small  vassals  and  de- 
pendents to  the  armed  forces  of  the  central  authority. 
Now  all  union  supposes  a  common  principle  of  action: 
the  Barons,  by  the  force  of  things,  must  have  had  in 
mind,  what  we  should  call  a  platform  .  .  .  which  was 
already  the  embryo  of  a  constitution.  Having  need  of 
the  help  of  their  liegemen,  they  must  have  treated  them 
with  circumspection,  taking  note  of  their  complaints, 
defending  their  interests  along  with  their  own,  and  later 
making  place  for  them  in  the  council  which  they  imposed 
upon  the  king. 

The  subjects  in  England  formed  a  class  of  more  weight 
and  importance  than  the  corresponding  class  on  the 
Continent.  Among  them  from  the  start,  before  the  de- 
velopment of  town  life  and  the  rise  of  an  urban  middle- 
class,  was  a  great  number  of  freeholders.  They  were  the 
descendants  of  the  soldiers  of  the  Conquest,  who  had 
received  the  gracious  gift  of  a  portion  of  arable  land,  or 
of  the  former  Saxon  proprietors  of  the  soil  whom  the 
Norman  kings  had  adroitly  and  liberally  conciliated  by 

1  V.  E.  Boutmy:    Developpement  de  la  Constitution  Anglaise,  Plon,  1887. 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  135 

leaving  them  in  possession  of  their  lands  and  independence. 
Hence  there  existed  in  England,  a  considerable  time  before 
the  rise  of  commerce  and  the  growth  of  personal  fortune 
could  give  birth  to  the  movement  of  the  Communes  in 
France,  a  nation  of  free  men,  founded  on  the  most  solid 
basis  known  to  mediaeval  society — landed  property. 
Instead  of  the  King  seeking  the  support  of  the  people 
against  the  encroachments  of  the  nobles,  as  was  the  case 
in  France,  here  the  nobles  secured  the  support  of  the 
people  against  the  Crown.  From  what  precedes,  one 
can  deduce  the  extent  to  which  the  line  of  political  evolu- 
tion in  England  must  have  diverged  from  the  line  of  po- 
litical evolution  in  France.  In  France,  the  King  finally 
overcame  the  resistance  of  the  nobles,  and  assumed  abso- 
lute power,  brutally  withdrawing  their  charters  from  the 
helpless  Communes.  In  England,  when  the  King  tried 
to  oppose  one  class  to  another  and  to  divide  in  order  to 
reign,  he  found  a  whole  nation  already  too  strongly  organ- 
ized for  his  purposes. 

The  instituting  of  regular  sources  of  revenue — a  vital 
necessity  of  all  States — determined  the  initial  resistance 
to  royal  arbitrariness.  Thomas  Becket  refused  to  pay 
the  tax  which  Henry  II  wished  to  appropriate  on  his 
own  authority  from  the  proceeds  of  the  Church  domains. 
Becket  paid  for  his  courageous  resistance  with  his  life. 
But  some  years  later,  in  1188,  the  tithe  of  the  Crusade 
was  fixed  and  apportioned  through  the  agency  of  a  jury 
of  tax-payers,  among  whom  were  free  men.  It  was  sig- 
nificant to  see  a  dignitary  of  the  Church,  that  is  to  say,  a 
representative  of  the  great  moral  force  of  the  Middle 
Ages  thus  taking  in  hand  the  defence  of  the  subject 
against  the  regime  of  "do-as-I -please";  through  his 
intervention  the  spirit  of  independence  of  the  Barons 
received  the  moral  sanction  of  Right.  Later,  another 
Primate  of  England,  Stephen  Langton,  played  the  leading 


136  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

r61e  in  the  revolt  of  the  Barons  against  John  Lackland, 
1215. 

The  King  reduced  to  powerlessness,  solemnly  consented 
to  recognize  the  guarantees  hitherto  accorded  intermit- 
tingly  and  precariously,  which  were  henceforth  to  be  re- 
corded in  the  Great  Charter — the  first  rudiment  of  a 
constitution  that  Europe  has  known.  Two  essential 
articles  were  expressly  stipulated  therein:  first,  no  tax 
shall  be  imposed  without  the  consent  of  the  Council  of 
the  Kingdom  (nisi  per  commune  consilium);  second,  no 
man  shall  be  imprisoned  or  punished  unless  he  has  been 
judged  by  his  peers,  according  to  the  laws  of  the  King- 
dom. The  two  essential  principles  of  private  and  public 
law  were  laid  down  for  the  first  time  in  a  modern 
state  since  the  fall  of  the  Roman  Empire;  the  right 
of  the  subject  to  approve  the  expenditures  for  the 
commonweal  and  the  guarantee  of  personal  inde- 
pendence against  all  acts  of  tyranny.  This  was,  no 
doubt,  only  a  first  step.  The  provisions  of  the  Great 
Charter  were  too  general  not  to  permit  of  their  being 
evaded;  then  again,  the  goodwill  of  the  kings  was  far 
from  being  favourable  to  the  application  of  such  pro- 
visions. However,  the  solemn  ceremony  of  the  signing 
of  the  Charter,  on  the  island  of  Runnymede  in  the 
middle  of  the  Thames,  was  one  of  those  events  in  the 
life  of  a  people  which  assume  a  symbolical  value 
because  they  synthesize  profound  sentiments  still  in- 
distinctly expressed  and  because  they  are  pregnant  with 
future  possibilities. 

The  Great  Charter  intimates  the  whole  future  of 
England.  No  doubt,  for  centuries,  the  nation  was  to 
be  obliged  to  maintain  a  struggle  against  the  Crown, 
to  obtain  the  respect  of  the  engagements  entered  upon  in 
1215,  and  to  create  the  organs  of  government  fit  to  secure 
its  execution.  But  henceforth,  Right  was  founded;  and 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  137 

England  was  destined  to  offer  a  spectacle  unique  in 
the  political  annals  of  the  world.  Each  time  she  was  to 
conquer  a  new  privilege,  she  was  to  appeal  to  the  prece- 
dents, the  established  traditions,  and,  as  they  were  termed 
later,  the  solemn  guarantees  of  the  Constitution.  The 
revolutions  themselves  were  to  be  simply  restorations  of 
liberty,  and  for  this  reason,  were  to  assume  such  a 
character  of  moderation  and  legality  that  the  attacks 
of  the  royal  power  alone  could  provoke  the  people  into 
armed  revolt. 

What  is  important  to  notice  here  is  the  fact  that  the 
Great  Charter  was  an  agreement  entered  upon  by  the 
King  with  the  whole  nation  and  not  merely  with  the  Barons 
and  Bishops  whose  material  and  moral  pressure  was  the 
determining  cause  of  this  first  constitutional  act.  So, 
as  early  as  the  first  years  of  the  thirteenth  century,  that 
is  nearly  a  hundred  years  before  Philippe  le  Bel,  in  France, 
had  summoned  the  first  Etats  Generaux,  the  common 
land-owners  in  England  were  already  strong  enough  and 
possessed  sufficient  real  power  to  oblige  the  nobility  to 
consider  the  expediency  of  defending  their  interests 
and  of  securing  their  support.  Already  was  noticeable 
throughout  the  country  the  formation  of  a  national 
spirit,  founded  on  the  solidarity  of  the  classes  and  on  the 
common  attachment  to  legal  liberty,  pledging  respect 
for  the  rights  of  the  subject  on  the  one  hand,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  respect  for  constitutional  authority.  Moral 
forces,  forces  of  imagination  and  sentiment  were  hence- 
forth attached  to  the  idea  of  constituted  liberty  and 
formed  its  most  solid  stay.  Two  centuries  before  French 
patriotism  became  embodied  in  Jeanne  d'Arc,  the  libera- 
tor of  France,  there  existed  a  type  of  English  patriotism, 
made  up  of  rudimentary  yet  perceptible  idealism,  of  law, 
of  justice,  and  of  liberty. 


138  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

What  explains  this  unity  of  aspiration  among  the 
English  people  is  a  certain  union  of  classes,  or  at  least  of 
the  upper  and  middle-classes,  which  is  indeed  very  strik- 
ing if  one  compares  it  with  the  division  that  prevailed 
in  French  society  at  the  same  epoch.  The  English  no- 
bility of  this  time  (with  the  exception  of  a  few  carping 
barons  like  Simon  de  Montfort)  does  not  deal  with 
Royalty  as  one  power  with  another;  it  is  not  a  military 
caste;  it  is  an  aristocracy,  very  proud,  occasionally  violent, 
but  resting  its  independence  on  the  ground  of  right.  It 
does  not  specialize  in  the  profession  of  arms,  no  doubt 
because  it  has  fewer  occasions  for  exercising  the  profession 
than  have  the  nobility  of  the  Continent.  Normally 
these  barons  and  lords  live  on  their  estates  in  frequent 
contact  with  the  country-folk,  without  any  cessation  of 
relations  with  the  free  land-owners  or  the  burghers  of  the 
towns. 

When  the  Kings  had  admitted  that  a  regular  assembly 
should  unite  periodically  to  vote  subsidies  and,  later  on, 
that  this  assembly  should  make  laws,  the  nobles  did  not 
separate  from  the  clergy  and  the  representatives  of  the 
middle-class.  The  lesser  nobility  (knights  and  squires) 
and  the  lesser  clergy,  whose  interests  were  similar  to  those 
of  the  freemen,  formed  the  habit  of  deliberating  with 
them  in  a  special  hall  and  thus,  by  accidental  arrangement, 
the  assembly  became  divided  into  two  Houses,  upper  and 
lower,  each  a  centre  of  interests  rather  than  of  classes. 
In  what  was  to  be  called  the  Parliament,  no  division  by 
Orders  accentuated  the  distance  between  the  different 
elements  of  the  nation.  The  upper  nobility,  direct  heirs 
of  the  ancient  Grand  Council,  remained  in  closer  touch 
with  the  King,  as  was  natural,  and  became  more  directly 
acquainted  with  the  secrets  of  State.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  Commons,  by  no  means  exclusively  composed  of  the 
Third  Estate  but  including  the  country  squires,  the  landed 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  139 

proprietors,  and  the  notables,  alone  enjoyed  the  preroga- 
tive— since  they  represented  the  greater  part  of  the  country 
— of  voting  the  taxes. 

Consequently,  there  were  no  conflicting  interests  or 
influences,  no  .abusive  privileges,  no  oppression  of  one 
class  by  another,  no  disdainful  treatments  or  humiliations, 
and  no  insuperable  frontiers.  Later,  when  the  country 
rose  against  the  tyranny  of  the  Stuarts,  some  of  the  upper 
nobility  were  found  among  the  adversaries  of  the  King 
and  some  of  the  Commoners  among  his  partisans.  These 
conditions  were  favourable  to  the  gradual  and  regular 
development  of  free  institutions:  the  constitutional 
history  of  England  is  a  pacific  history  in  which  the  two 
revolutions  of  the  seventeenth  century  were  only  acci- 
dents, without  profound  repercussion  on  the  temperament 
of  the  people  and  on  the  character  of  the  institutions. 

The  assembly  at  Runnymede  in  1215  was  the  first  step 
in  national  representation.  It  laid  down  the  essential 
principles  of  all  government  control  by  the  nation,  namely 
the  right  reserved  to  the  representatives  to  vote  taxes, 
to  fix  their  amount,  and  to  discuss  their  use.  That  is 
precisely  the  origin  of  all  limitation  of  the  royal  power, 
of  all  guarantee  against  absolutism,  and  of  all  juridical 
establishments  of  liberty.  Being  master  of  the  budget, 
the  Parliament  could  refuse  the  necessary  resources  for 
such  and  such  a  policy  and  exercise  an  immediate  influence 
on  the  direction  of  State  affairs.  In  proportion  with  the 
progress  of  the  juridical  idea  within  the  social  body,  this 
right  of  criticism,  of  counsel,  and  of  control,  was  destined  to 
develop  into  the  right  to  legislate,  and,  in  the  course  of 
centuries,  after  struggles,  many  of  which  were  pacific, 
the  King  was  to  be  finally  dispossessed  of  the  legislative 
power  and  to  retain  only  the  executive  power.  Such  is 
the  separation  of  powers  which  Montesquieu,  a  disciple 
and  admirer  of  English  political  law,  designated  as  the 


140  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

very  essence  of  a  Limited  Monarchy,  the  first  condition  of 
liberty.  Montesquieu  did  not  see  the  end  of  the  con- 
stitutional conflict  in  England.  The  last  victory  of  this 
conflict,  before  the  advent  of  Democracy,  was  the  delega- 
tion of  the  executive  power  to  the  Cabinet.  The  King 
became  the  impartial  arbitrator  between  the  parties,  a 
sovereign  respectful  of  the  will  of  the  people.  He  no 
longer  exercised  anything  beyond  a  discreet  influence, 
but  being  unable  to  do  wrong  ("the  King  can  do  no 
wrong")  was  so  much  the  more  respected  and  became  the 
living  symbol  of  the  nation.  Let  us  pass  in  review  the 
stages  of  this  gradual  and  incessant  progress,  noteworthy 
in  that  it  was  almost  free  from  crises. 

•  •••••• 

It  was  in  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  in  1254, 
that  the  Council  of  the  King  first  assumed  the  name  of 
the  Parliament,  and  that  the  principle  of  elective  repre- 
sentation was  established  for  the  Knights.  The  rebel, 
Simon  de  Montfort,  during  the  short  period  of  his  rule, 
called  together  a  Parliament  of  which  he  increased  the 
membership  by  introducing  representatives  of  the  free 
land-owners  and  of  the  Commoners.  The  elements  of 
the  representative  assembly  were  thus  constituted.  It 
was  Edward  I  the  King-legislator,  the  Justinian  of  the 
English  Middle  Ages,  who  consecrated  definitely  the 
rights  so  far  acquired  by  convoking,  in  1295,  the  Model 
Parliament.  This  great  king,  anticipating  future  pro- 
gress, adopted  the  following  motto:  Keep  the  pact 
(Pactum  servo),  thus  taking  upon  himself,  vis-a-vis  his 
people,  the  engagement  which  the  French  people  were  not 
able  to  exact  from  their  King  till  five  centuries  later,  in 
1790. 

In  the  fourteenth  century  the  Parliament  separated  into 
two  Houses,  the  attributes  of  which  were  not  at  first  dis- 
tinctly defined.  But  in  1407,  Henry  IV.,  having  applied 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  141 

to  the  House  of  Lords  to  obtain  the  fixing  of  the  rate  of 
the  "  aid- tax, "  the  Commons  refused  to  accept  the  de- 
cision of  the  House  of  Lords,  and  the  King  recognized 
the  rule  "that  in  matters  of  finance,  he  would  receive  the 
resolution  of  the  two  Houses  through  the  Speaker  of  the 
House  of  Commons."  By  this  same  decree,  the  King 
recognized  the  people's  right — the  right  of  the  whole 
people — to  fix  the  expenses  of  which  they  supported  the 
charge,  and  guaranteed,  at  the  same  time,  the  liberty 
of  the  Lower  House  to  deliberate. 

The  fifteenth  century  was  that  sombre  and  tragic 
epoch  of  the  history  of  England  in  which  two  factions  of  the 
nobility  grouped  themselves  around  rival  pretenders  and 
came  near  destroying  each  other  in  the  long  and  terrible 
War  of  the  Roses.  In  the  course  of  this  sanguinary  quarrel 
the  influence  of  the  nobility  was  annihilated  and  when 
peace  was  finally  made  the  great  families  had  disappeared. 
During  this  long  eclipse  of  the  power  of  the  aristocracy, 
the  Parliament  continued  to  discharge  its  duties.  The 
nation  lived  its  life  notwithstanding  all ;  indeed,  it  was  in  a 
still  better  position  to  maintain  its  safe-guards  because  the 
power  of  the  Crown  was  weaker.  The  House  of  Commons 
assumed  the  upper  hand  and  turned  its  consolidated  situa- 
tion to  account  in  constituting  itself  more  and  more  a 
deliberative  assembly.  Thus  precedents  were  established, 
certain  forms  and  limits  were  set  up,  destined  to  permit 
Parliament,  as  soon  as  the  circumstances  should  be  favour- 
able, to  evolve,  thanks  to  the  solid  support  of  precedent, 
along  the  lines  already  indicated. 

The  internal  struggle  of  the  fifteenth  century  resulted 
in  the  absolutism  of  the  Tudors.  The  Crown,  disembar- 
rassed of  the  resistance  of  the  great  families,  allowed  itself 
to  be  carried  away  by  an  ambition  for  irresponsible  power 
without  check  or  control .  .  .  the  sort  of  ambition  cynically 
extolled  by  Machiavelli,  which  was  then  in  favour  among 


142  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

most  European  powers.  Henry  VII  created  a  new  no- 
bility entirely  devoted  to  his  interests.  Henry  VIII 
broke  with  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  dispossessed 
the  abbeys  and  monasteries,  and  succeeded  in  winning 
the  new  nobles  to  his  support  by  distributing  to  them  the 
ecclesiastical  domains.  The  Tudors,  however,  had  to 
reckon  with  their  people.  They  dared  not  abolish  the 
institution  of  Parliament;  but  they  invaded  the  limita- 
tions which  it  imposed  by  procuring  new  sources  of  revenue 
that  were  exempt  from  the  control  of  the  national  re- 
presentatives. But  the  forms  of  liberty  still  persisted 
and  not  many  years  were  to  pass  before  these  forms  were  to 
become  once  more  the  substantial  and  effective  guarantees 
of  Parliament.  The  Tudors  (except  Bloody  Mary,  whose 
reign  only  lasted  six  years)  found  a  means  of  obtaining 
pardon  for  their  political  absolutism  by  favouring  the 
Reform.  England  became  Protestant.  Parallel  with  the 
official  creed,  sects  were  formed,  to  which  the  sovereign, 
although  he  had  become  the  head  of  the  English  Church, 
raised  no  objections.  The  spirit  of  free  examination, 
thus  favoured,  re- acted  on  the  spirit  of  political  liberty. 
And  so,  when  the  Stuarts  outbidding  the  Tudors,  at- 
tempted to  bring  about  the  triumph  of  the  royal  will  and 
pleasure  in  both  the  governmental  and  ecclesiastical 
spheres,  the  people  rose  in  revolt. 

The  revolution,  which  was  to  cost  Charles  I  his  crown 
and  his  head,  remained  within  the  law  as  long  as  the  King 
did  not  try  by  force  to  put  an  end  to  Parliament.  How- 
ever, even  in  the  early  days  of  the  reign  the  energy  of 
the  voices  raised  in  protest  showed  that  there  was  some- 
thing radically  different  in  the  temper  of  the  nation  since 
the  already  distant  epoch  preceding  the  Renaissance,  the 
Reform,  and  the  rise  of  the  middle-class.  The  representa- 
tives were  no  longer  disposed  to  bow  assent  to  the  goodwill 
of  the  King.  Accordingly,  when  the  favourite  Buck- 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  143 

ingham  had  provoked  the  indignation  of  the  country  by  his 
insolence  and  debauchery,  Sir  John  Eliot,  speaking  with  a 
boldness  unheard  of  in  the  annals  of  the  Assembly,  rose 
in  Parliament  to  demand  that  Buckingham  forfeit  the 
duties  of  Prime  Minister.  Eliot  was  thrown  into  prison; 
but,  as  a  consequence,  the  cause  of  liberty,  which  had  thus 
its  first  martyr,  was  greatly  strengthened. 

The  Petition  of  Rights,  1628,  reminded  the  monarch  of 
the  obligations  of  the  Crown  frequently  acknowledged 
since  the  signing  of  the  Great  Charter,  and  Charles  believed 
it  prudent  to  let  the  nation  suppose,  at  least,  that  he  re- 
cognized such  obligations.  The  struggle  continued  with 
spirit,  on  the  constitutional  ground:  Pym  affirmed  the 
ascendancy  of  the  House  of  Commons  over  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  over  royalty  itself;  Hampden  refused  to  pay 
the  tax  of  ship-money,  which  had  not  been  legally  voted 
by  Parliament;  the  poet  Milton  became  the  mouth-piece 
of  the  austere  fervour  of  the  Puritans,  who  had  decided 
not  to  allow  the  re-establishment  by  an  act  of  authority 
of  a  creed  against  which  the  country  had  pronounced  its 
judgment.  The  first  acts  of  hostility  on  the  part  of  the 
Royalists  were  checkmated  by  Cromwell's  organization 
of  the  brigade  of  Iron-sides  which  finally  overthrew  the 
Crown. 

The  Monarchy  of  Divine  Right  existed  no  longer. 
Charles  II,  who  was  able  to  resume,  thanks  to  the  lassitude 
of  the  nation,  some  of  the  plans  of  his  father,  was  obliged, 
however,  to  accept  the  absolute  control  of  Parliament  in 
financial  matters.  There  were  no  more  periods  in  English 
history  during  which  the  King  failed  to  convoke  the 
Parliament;  the  constitutional  organ  of  political  liberty 
had  become  the  necessary  machinery  of  Government. 
At  the  same  time,  personal  liberty,  already  affirmed  in  the 
Great  Charter  was  sanctioned  by  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act, 
which  rendered  all  British  subjects  inviolable. 


144  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

The  second  Revolution,  brought  about  by  the  folly  and 
fanaticism  of  James  II,  was  marked  by  but  few  acts  of 
hostility.  The  resulting  change  of  dynasty,  imposed  by  the 
will  of  the  people,  accentuated  the  constitutional  character 
of  the  King,  who  became  the  first  servant  of  the  nation. 
The  ancient  immunities  of  the  Kingdom  were  codified  in 
the  Bill  of  Rights  (1689),  which  gave  them  a  clearer  form 
without  changing  their  essence.  It  was  stipulated  that 
the  budget  should  be  voted  annually,  and,  hence,  that 
Parliament  should  hold  annual  sessions.  The  disposal 
of  the  budget  involved  legislative  power;  so  the  King  gave 
up  taking  any  measure  without  the  approbation  of 
Parliament. 

Soon  after,  a  conflict  having  arisen  between  the  Cabinet 
and  the  House  of  Commons,  the  latter  consented  to  re- 
sume the  normal  course  of  deliberations  indispensable  to 
the  State  administration,  only  after  a  new  group  of  Cabinet 
Ministers  had  been  chosen  and  accepted  by  Parliament. 
The  ministers  who  had  been,  until  then,  servants  of  the 
Crown,  became  the  executive  agents  of  the  Houses  and 
were  indirectly  selected  by  the  majority.  Parliamen- 
tarism was  henceforth  in  possession  of  its  full  means  of 
action.  The  eighteenth  century  was  to  be  employed  in 
fixing  the  procedure,  in  rendering  the  machinery  work- 
able, and  in  creating  the  state  of  mind,  or,  as  Montesquieu 
puts  it,  the  "habits"  without  which  institutions  are  but 
vain  forms. 

The  two  revolutions  of  the  seventeenth  century  were 
the  work  of  the  middle-class;  both  were  profitable  to  the 
directing  elite  of  this  class,  composed  of  the  important 
landed-proprietors  who  were  styled  the  gentry.  The  rich 
commoners  of  the  towns  were  admitted  into  the  gentry 
whenever  they  bought  an  estate.  The  Government, 
then,  was  in  the  hands  of  an  oligarchy  whose  power  was 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  145 

based  on  landed-propriety.  It  was  this  class  and  this 
government  which  definitely  won  for  England  the  guaran- 
tees of  liberty. 

In  the  nineteenth  century  when  the  people  became 
conscious  of  themselves,  and,  stimulated  by  the  example 
of  the  French  Revolution,  wished  to  participate  in  political 
life,  the  ranks  of  the  oligarchy  opened  little  by  little 
under  pressure  from  below  and  the  Democracy  grew  in 
strength,  without  any  violent  conflict,  but  with  enough 
prudence  to  conserve  the  gains  of  the  past,  and  with 
enough  pliancy  to  leave  room  for  the  promises  of  the 
future. 

The  English  middle-classes  won  liberty  for  themselves 
and  exercised  it,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  not  only  with 
the  jealous  concern  of  defending  themselves  against  the 
encroachments  of  the  royal  power,  but  also  with  a  high 
sense  of  their  responsibilities  towards  the  people.  The 
eyes  of  the  French  philosophers  were  turned  towards 
England;  Voltaire,  Montesquieu,  Rousseau  sojourned  or 
travelled  there;  in  France  the  first  hint  of  reform  came 
from  across  the  Channel.  England  was  conscious  of  the 
importance  that  her  institutions  were  assuming  and  were 
eventually  to  assume  in  the  history  of  political  progress. 
She  had  her  philosophers,  Locke  and  Hume  for  instance, 
who,  under  the  inspiration  of  the  free  and  regulated  society 
in  which  they  lived,  discussed  the  principles  of  govern- 
ment; others,  such  as  Delolme  and  Blackstone,  who 
analysed  the  English  Constitution  itself,  and  heralded 
the  work  which  was  to  surpass  them  all : — the  masterly 
production  of  Montesquieu. 

England,  in  short,  was  proud  of  her  liberty.  One 
should  read  in  the  works  of  one  of  the  best  poets  of  the 
time,  William  Cowper,  author  of  The  Task,  a  passage  in 
Book  V.,  written  in  1785,  four  years  before  the  French 
Revolution.  It  may  be  seen  from  this  passage  that  the 


146  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

English  writer,  vaunting  the  superiority  of  free  England 
over  enslaved  France,  makes  use  of  the  Bastile  as  the 
sinister  symbol  of  tyranny,  and  longs  for  the  day  when 
this  fortress  of  despotism  will  be  razed  to  the  ground. 

Then  shame  to  manhood,  and  opprobrious  more 

To  France,  than  all  her  losses  and  defeats 

Old  or  of  later  date,  by  sea  or  land, 

Her  house  of  bondage  worse  than  that  of  old 

Which  God  avenged  on  Pharaoh, — the  Bastile. 

Ye  horrid  towers,  the  abode  of  broken  hearts; 

Ye  dungeons  and  ye  cages  of  despair, 

That  monarchs  have  supplied  from  age  to  age 

With  music  such  as  suits  their  sovereign  ears, 

The  sighs  and  groans  of  miserable  men ! 

There's  not  an  English  heart  that  would  not  leap 

To  hear  that  ye  were  fallen  at  last,  to  know 

That  even  our  enemies,  so  oft  employed 

In  forging  chains  for  us,  themselves  were  free. 

For  he  that  values  liberty,  confines 

His  zeal  for  her  predominance  within 

No  narrow  bounds;  her  cause  engages  him 

Wherever  pleaded. 


Liberty,  such  as  England  understood  the  principle  at 
this  epoch,  has  been  defined  by  the  statesman  philosopher, 
Burke,  a  contemporary  of  the  American  and  French 
Revolutions.  Placed  midway  between  the  Tories,  adula- 
tors of  George  III,  and  the  Radicals,  precursors  of  newer 
times,  he  best  represented  the  average  opinion  of  his 
day.  Burke  was  a  Whig,  that  is  to  say,  a  representative 
of  that  liberal  aristocracy  which  defended  liberty  but 
wanted  it  disciplined,  conservative  and  prudent,  and 
which  feared  to  see  the  rise  to  power  of  a  new  class,  without 
culture,  political  experience,  or  that  delicacy  of  feeling 


England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815)  147 

and  fineness  of  intelligence  which  go  to  make  up  the 
gentleman. 

Burke  fought  with  all  his  strength  in  favour  of  the 
Insurgents  of  America,  because,  in  their  resistance  to  the 
arbitrary  taxes  which  the  metropolis  wished  to  impose,  he 
saw  the  application  of  the  ancient  and  venerable  privilege 
of  the  English  people  to  pay  only  those  taxes  on  which 
it  had  voted  affirmatively.  The  American  Revolution 
was  a  legitimate  revolt  in  the  name  of  the  tradition  sanc- 
tioned by  centuries  of  usage.  In  the  French  Revolution, 
he  perceived,  from  the  beginning,  long  before  the  Terreur 
and  the  deviation  towards  military  despotism,  certain 
dangerous  elements  well  calculated  to  seduce  men  to 
destroy  the  world  with  fire  and  sword,  but  not  sufficiently 
in  keeping  with  the  natural  laws  of  the  development  of 
societies  to  permit  of  any  constructive  work  or  of  any 
lasting  result.  His  philosophical  intuition,  both  acute 
and  profound,  laid  bare  the  weakness  of  absolute  idealism; 
his  criticism,  if  one  eliminates  its  virulent  explosions  of 
wrath  and  hatred,  pronounced  a  most  equitable  judgment 
upon  the  defects  of  "the  doctrine  of  Reason"  and  upon 
the  dangers  of  the  revolutionary  method,  or  as  designated 
nowadays,  the  "catastrophic"  method. 

Nevertheless,  his  point  of  view,  altogether  insular  and 
pervaded  with  the  prejudices  of  the  Whig  oligarchy,  not 
only  ignored  historical  causes  and  the  particular  situation 
of  France,  but  remained  blindly  closed  both  to  the  fruitful 
promises  which  the  Revolution  contained,  as  well  as  to  the 
bold  truths  which  French  logic,  despite  the  apparent 
contradiction  of  facts,  imposed  upon  the  future,  and  also 
the  pregnant  principles  of  humanity,  of  justice,  and  of 
emancipation,  which  French  generosity  disseminated  over 
the  world. 

After  many  terrible  years  of  internal  convulsion  and 
external  adventure,  France  was  about  to  feel  the  need  of 


148  England,  Mother  of  Liberty.     (1215-1815) 

learning  the  applications  of  English  liberty  which  Burke 
raised  to  a  political  philosophy;  she  was  about  to  attend 
Burke's  school  of  realism,  and  understand  that  the  life 
of  a  nation  does  not  evolve  ideally  according  to  a  rigid 
line  of  abstract  reasoning  but  concretely  according  to  a 
sinuous  line,  often  bent  back  on  itself,  often  thrown  out 
of  direction  by  the  sentiments,  habits,  and  prejudices 
which  are  imposed  by  experiences,  traditions,  historical 
fatalities,  social  instinct,  and  the  national  spirit. 

On  the  other  hand — after  twenty-five  years  of  blind 
reaction,  due  to  the  fear  of  the  Revolution  and  the  menace 
of  Napoleon — England  was  about  ready  to  receive  what 
the  French  doctrine  contained  of  truth,  of  generosity, 
and,  once  better  understood,  of  example.  The  history 
of  the  nineteenth  century  in  England,  which  was  to  be 
that  of  the  development  of  Democracy,  may  be  considered 
in  part  as  resulting  from  the  initial  shock  of  the  French 
Revolution. 

The  French  ideal  and  the  English  ideal  were  to  en- 
counter each  other  with  the  result  of  enriching,  broadening, 
and  strengthening  the  principle  of  Liberty. 


CHAPTER  VII 

EnglisK    Individualism    and    German 
"State-ism."     First  Part  (1815-1867) 

TV  THEN  Burke  declared  himself  the  irreconcilable 
YY  enemy  of  the  French  Revolution  and  led 
England  in  a  crusade  against  France,  it  was, 
in  the  last  analysis,  because  he  saw  in  the  men  of  1793  the 
founders  of  a  new  order  of  things.  He  forgot  what  they 
had  borrowed  from  English  liberty  and  considered  only 
the  innovations  in  their  doctrine  and  methods  which,  if 
victorious,  were  destined,  in  his  thought,  to  destroy  the 
age-old  work  of  liberty  in  England  itself.  The  govern- 
ment of  the  wealthy  minority,  well-educated,  respectful 
of  precedents,  self-governing  and  capable  of  understanding 
the  complexity  of  political  problems,  was  to  be  supplanted 
by  the  government  of  the  mass  of  the  people,  ignorant,  ir- 
responsible, impulsive,  actuated  by  elementary  ideas, 
indifferent  to  the  subtle  action  and  reaction  of  the  forces, 
currents,  and  interests  constituting  collective  life.  Burke 
was  right  to  be  alarmed.  France  herself,  in  looking  back 
over  more  than  a  century,  still  contemplates  with  emotion 
the  audacity  of  the  men  of  '89  who  led  her  into  an  era 
of  revolution  and  painful  reconstruction.  But  Burke, 
believer  in  the  past  as  he  was,  did  not  have  sufficient  con- 
fidence in  the  future.  A  stupendous  movement  had  com- 
menced. Political  prudence  ought  to  have  counselled 

149 


150         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

moderating  rather  than  completely  checking  the  move- 
ment. The  spirit  of  liberty  was  on  its  way  down  into 
the  lower  strata  of  society,  from  the  second  to  the  third 
and  then  to  the  fourth  Estate.  It  was  to  become  the  soul 
of  a  new  regime  in  England,  a  prolongation  of  the  old, 
but  henceforth  complicated  with  serious  problems. 
The  regime  of  democracy  was  about  to  be  established, 
and  shortly  afterwards,  the  regime  of  social  democracy. 
In  Burke's  time,  liberty  was  the  mainspring  of  the  political 
organism.  Forty  years  later  it  was  the  same  force,  no 
longer  considered  as  an  element  of  class  defence  but  as 
the  protective  principle  of  the  whole  nation ;  it  was  then  to 
receive  the  name  of  individualism.  Still  half  a  century 
later,  individualism  was  to  undergo  still  another  trans- 
formation :  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  separate  it  from  a 
strong  social  organization;  it  was  no  longer  thought  of 
except  under  a  socialistic  form  laying  weight  upon  the 
solidarity  of  society.  Hence  the  problem  of  liberty  had 
been  considerably  transformed  and  complicated:  the  idea 
of  liberty  had  been  brought  into  question  and  sometimes 
held  in  check;  finally  it  had  been  victorious  after  having 
been  modified  by  a  conciliation  of  the  rights  of  the  in- 
dividual with  the  rights  of  the  collectivity. 

The  history  of  the  nineteenth  century  presents  two 
successive  phases:  the  development  of  democracy  and 
the  converging  of  democracy  with  social  legislation.  The 
force  which  first  originated  in  England  and  was  after- 
wards powerfully  influenced  by  the  French  Revolution — 
Liberty — is  to  follow  its  own  evolution  on  the  one  hand 
and,  on  the  other,  to  undergo  the  pressure  of  another  force 
which  was  latent  both  in  the  older  England  and  in  Revo- 
lutionary France,  namely,  the  force  of  social  cohesion. 
In  France  and  in  England,  however,  social  cohesion  is  to 
be  established  only  to  guarantee  liberty  more  effectively; 
democracy  is  to  become  more  and  more  socialistically 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         151 

inclined  without  ceasing  to  be  preoccupied  especially 
with  the  autonomy  of  the  individual ;  the  State,  which  is 
only  the  servant  of  all,  is  to  play  a  fuller  part  in  legislating 
and  arbitrating,  without  trespassing  on  the  essential  rights 
of  citizens;  the  growing  sense  of  solidarity  is  to  lead  to  the 
respect  of  individualism. 

To  study  the  genesis  of  democracy  and  the  socialistic 
developments  of  democracy  in  England  in  the  nineteenth 
century  and  in  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth,  is  to  follow 
the  modifications  and  extensions  of  the  individualistic 
idea.  I  shall  make  the  characteristics  of  this  evolution 
more  striking  by  contrasting  it  with  the  progress  or  rather 
with  the  invasion  of  governmental  intervention  in  Ger- 
many, which  little  by  little,  in  certain  domains — and 
precisely  in  those  which  most  concern  the  enriching  of  the 
human  personality — has  annihilated  individualism.  It  is 
no  longer  a  question,  in  that  country,  of  social  reforms 
compatible  with  liberty,  but  of  State  socialism  or  more 
precisely  of  State-ism  which,  instead  of  favouring  the 
spiritual  development  of  the  individual,  of  raising  him  to  a 
higher  level  of  humanity,  reduces  him  to  the  r61e  of  a 
wheel  in  a  machine.  The  results  of  this  have  long  escaped 
the  world  at  large  dazzled  by  the  material  prosperity  of 
Germany  and  fascinated  by  her  military  prestige:  they 
reveal  themselves  today  in  the  aberration  of  pride  of  the 
whole  nation,  in  its  contempt  for  the  opinion  of  civiliza- 
tion, in  its  madness  for  conquest  which  borders  on  the 
madness  of  suicide,  and  in  the  shameful  outburst  of 
barbarous  appetites,  vices,  and  instincts,  dissimulated 
under  a  thin  varnish  of  artificial  politeness.  Demo- 
cratic and  social  individualisni  is  the  civilizing  force 
which  has  lifted  France  and  England  to  the  front  rank 
among  the  noble  nations :  the  annihilation  of  the  individual, 
considered  as  a  living  spirit,  is  the  rust  which  has  operated 
so  destructively  in  the  apparently  formidable  framework 


152         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

of  German  society;  the  enormous  steel  carcass,  clamped 
with  the  rigid  chains  of  administrative  formalism,  encloses 
nothing  but  emptiness. 

England,  unlike  France,  did  not  pass  at  one  step  into 
integral  democracy,  at  the  risk  of  keeping  up,  for  three 
parts  of  a  century,  a  painful  and  wearing  struggle  to 
attain  a  state  of  equilibrium.  The  shock  of  the  French 
Revolution  determined  in  England  an  initial  movement, 
which,  arrested  by  the  conservative  reaction  of  the  Great 
War  period,  resumed  its  course  after  1815  and  gathered 
momentum  gradually,  without  violent  collision,  assuming, 
by  reason  of  conditions  peculiar  to  England — survival  of 
traditions  and  economic  evolution — a  character  distinctly 
original. 

At  the  time  when  the  middle-class,  in  France,  seized 
the  power  abruptly,  in  1789,  the  corresponding  class  in 
England  was  content  to  be  governed  by  an  oligarchy  of 
great  landed  proprietors — the  people  were  not  taken  into 
account.  The  literature  of  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century  willingly  treated,  sometimes,  indeed,  in  lyrical 
mood,  the  subject  of  liberty;  but  its  concern  was  with 
English  liberty  and  not  with  theoretical  and  abstract 
liberty  born  from  the  logical  exigencies  of  reason  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  articles  of  the  French  Declaration  des 
Droits.  There  is  continuity  between  the  eighteenth  and 
nineteenth  centuries:  the  notion  of  liberty  spreads  to  a 
new  class  of  citizens  and,  in  the  course  of  the  economic 
transformations  of  society,  displaces  its  angle  of  incidence, 
but  does  not  become  modified  in  its  essence.  In  com- 
parison with  the  French  notion  of  liberty,  English  liberty 
constitutes  a  variety,  not  less  noble,  nor  less  useful  to  the 
progress  of  the  human  conscience,  but  different.  Each 
was  destined  to  unite  with  the  other — and  they  have 
fortunately  united — for  the  good  of  the  world. 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         153 

French  liberty  and  English  liberty  are  essentially,  and  to 
an  equal  extent,  the  expression  of  a  psychical  need.  It  is 
to  our  honour  and  to  the  honour  of  our  English  friends  to 
have  kept  in  view,  in  the  midst  of  a  century  of  scientific 
and  industrial  mechanism,  this  principle  of  psychical  need 
and  to  have  remained,  despite  the  general  tendency,  a 
collectivity  of  souls.  We  are  ready  to  accept  mechanism 
wherever  it  is  necessary  (indeed  we  know  how  to  draw 
surprising  effects  from  its  use,  thanks  to  our  qualities  of 
invention  and  daring) :  but  we  have  not  allowed  our- 
selves to  be  absorbed  by  it.  We  respect  the  law  of  things, 
but  we  do  not  abdicate  the  sovereignty  of  spiritual  rights. 
To  the  brutal  rigidity  of  fact,  we  oppose  the  elasticity  of 
Reason,  the  elan  of  feeling,  and  the  creative  force  of  will. 
To  cite  only  one  example,  in  what  concerns  France  and 
the  events  connected  with  the  present  war: — the  victory 
of  German  arms  in  1870  is  a  fact  which  the  pride  and 
unrelenting  harshness  of  the  conqueror  rendered  iniquitous 
by  the  mutilation  of  France;  against  this  iniquitous  fact, 
our  sense  of  justice  has  revolted  with  a  persistence  which 
remains  an  object  of  astonishment  to  the  Germans. 
"It  is  a  characteristic  trait  of  the  French  people,"  wrote 
Herr  von  Bulow,  "to  place  psychical  before  material 
needs."  Justice  and  liberty  are  sentiments  which  are 
on  an  equal  footing :  injustice  is  a  crime  against  the  moral 
person,  consequently  a  diminution  of  liberty.  The  Eng- 
lish have  the  same  attachment  to  noble  sentiments. 
They  do  not  manifest  them,  as  we  do,  in  exterior  demon- 
stration, but,  under  their  apparent  impassibility,  is  hidden 
a  profound  emotional  tendency  which  is  expressed  in  the 
form  of  tenacity,  pride,  and  determination.  With  them, 
as  with  us,  it  is  individual  independence — legal  and 
moral  independence — which  gives  its  value  to  national 
independence.  Their  patriotism,  like  ours,  is  nourished 
with  lofty  aspiration.  It  has  nothing  in  common  with 


154         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

the  fierce  appetite  for  domination  which  the  Germans 
adorn  with  the  same  name.  The  mother  country,  for 
the  Germans,  has  become  an  association  for  material  ad- 
vancement, and,  should  an  opportunity  offer,  for  robbery, 
by  the  agency  of  militarism  and  administrative  despotism 
and  at  the  cost  of  a  dead-levelling  of  individualities. 
For  the  English,  as  for  the  French,  patriotism  is  the  union, 
under  the  aegis  of  liberty,  of  moral  and  spiritual  energies 
with  a  view  to  the  fullest  expansion  of  individualities. 
The  moral  history  of  England  during  all  epochs,  but  more 
especially  during  the  days  of  democratic  development, 
is  really  the  history  of  English  individualism. 

The  French  philosophers  of  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  who  brought  about  the  expansion  on  our  soil 
of  the  individualist  forces  of  the  Revolution,  owed  a 
great  deal  to  English  thought.  Their  rationalism  con- 
tributed thereto  the  element  of  theoretical  rigour  and 
universality.  Jean- Jacques  Rousseau  wrote  the  Contrat 
Social  according  to  the  mathematical  method  dear  to 
Descartes,  observing  social  facts  from  a  distance,  and,  to 
the  extent  to  which  these  facts,  being  simplified  and 
lightened  of  the  complexities  of  reality,  could  be  general- 
ized into  abstractions  and  expressed  in  formulas.  The 
men  of  the  Revolution,  guided  by  the  same  fondness  for 
logical  propositions,  of  the  axiom  type,  supported  for 
ten  years  the  superhuman  effort  of  trying  to  realize  the 
ideal  in  human  affairs.  They  broke  down  under  the 
strain;  but  the  hopes  conceived  and  the  principles  propa- 
gated throughout  the  world  lived  on  in  the  thought  of 
future  generations — in  France  and  outside  of  France — as 
important  verities,  unattainable  no  doubt  in  their  in- 
tegrality, but  worthy  of  being  maintained  as  distant 
beacons  of  human  action.  England  was  not  insensible 
to  the  appeal.  But  she  allowed  herself  to  be  influenced 


Individualism  and  " State-ism"          155 

by  French  thought  only  in  as  far  as  it  could  be  embodied 
in  her  tradition,  and  moderated  by  her  political  prudence, 
temperament,  and  the  lessons  of  her  history. 

France  had  passed  without  transition — under  the  in- 
fluence of  rationalistic  idealism — from  absolute  monarchy 
to  integral  democracy.  England,  already  in  possession 
of  her  constitutional  liberties,  advanced  by  degrees, 
without  hurry,  without  preconceived  designs  of  a  specula- 
tive order,  along  the  same  highway  which  she  took  a 
century  to  travel  over  .  .  .  taking  time  to  fortify  herself 
in  each  position  won  and  to  prepare  the  advance  of  the 
morrow.  This  circumspection  permitted  her  to  consider 
without  surprise  the  birth  and  growth  of  the  democratic 
problem  as  well  as  the  development  of  the  social  problem 
and  to  make  a  parallel  study  of  both,  sometimes  furnishing 
for  both  joint  solutions,  and  sometimes  opposing  one  to 
the  other  and  thus  keeping  them  both  provisionally  in 
suspense.  * 

Toward  1830,  the  conservative  reaction,  determined  by 
fear  of  revolutionary  excess,  was  entirely  spent.  A  new 
class,  the  manufacturers  of  the  city  agglomerations  aspired 
to  a  share  in  the  government  of  the  country.  Indeed 
the  transformation  of  England  into  an  industrial  country, 
had  rendered  the  existing  bases  of  national  representation 
inadequate.  While  the  towns  had  suddenly  grown  at 
the  expense  of  the  country,  the  right  to  elect  members 
of  Parliament  had  remained  in  possession  of  the  rural 
boroughs,  sometimes  reduced  to  a  few  farmers.  The 
Government  was  in  the  power  of  the  landed  interests — 
of  the  landlords  who  no  longer  formed  the  majority  of  the 
country.  Furthermore,  the  influence  of  the  aristocracy 
was  too  easily  exercised  on  the  constituencies  often  com- 
posed of  a  few  of  the  landlord's  tenants.  The  House  of 
Commons  was  thus  transformed  into  an  assembly  subject 
to  the  House  of  Lords ;  the  national  will  was  becoming  the 


156         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

will  of  a  handful  of  important  families.  A  reform  was 
urgent;  but,  except  for  a  small  group  of  theorists  who 
assumed  the  appellation  of  "Radicals, "  it  was  not  in  the 
name  of  the  "Rights  of  Man"  that  the  reform  was  de- 
manded. The  concrete  English  mind  was  little  accessible 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  "Sovereignty  of  the  people"  and 
of  the  "political  equality"  of  the  citizens.  On  the  con- 
trary it  adapted  itself  to  the  inequalities  in  the  Constitu- 
tion, to  its  anomalies  and  apparent  illogicalness,  thanks 
to  which  certain  competent  and  self-sacrificing  elements, 
likely  to  be  disregarded  or  envied  by  universal  suffrage, 
were  at  the  country's  disposal.  It  was  not,  then,  the 
wish  to  establish,  by  right  of  vote,  an  artificial  equiva- 
lence, which  maintained  the  reform  movement.  Two 
causes,  one  relating  to  the  age-old  tradition  of  liberty, 
and  the  other,  to  the  concrete  conditions  of  productive 
activity,  united  the  majority  of  the  nation  in  the  common 
purpose  of  renovating  the  elective  system. 

Among  the  great  land-owners  monopolizing  the  power, 
the  Whigs,  being  more  firmly  attached  to  liberty,  were 
more  particularly  concerned  about  the  Crown's  encroach- 
ment upon  Parliamentary  prerogatives  and  about  the 
displacement,  to  the  Crown's  advantage,  of  the  even 
distribution  of  powers  .  .  .  that  delicate  and  subtle  sys- 
tem of  counterpoise  and  check  upon  which  the  Con- 
stitution reposed.  The  royal  power  had  been  responsible 
for  the  American  War  of  Independence  which  had  cut 
the  Anglo-Saxon  world  into  two  portions.  Owing  to  a 
system  of  favours,  sinecures,  and  pensions,  and  also  to  the 
corruption  prevalent  in  the  Rotten-  Boroughs,  the  King 
was  becoming  unduly  and  dangerously  important  in  the 
Government.  And  so  it  was  urgent  to  bring  about  the 
elimination  of  these  "rotten  boroughs"  by  a  rearrange- 
ment of  the  voting  districts  and  to  renew  the  electoral  and 
representative  bodies  by  the  admission  of  a  new  class  to 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         157 

the  voting  qualification.  Furthermore,  those  whom  the 
existing  organization  excluded  from  power — the  manufac- 
turers and  merchants,  whose  new  importance  in  the  State 
was  due  to  their  recently  acquired  riches — felt  that 
certain  questions  were  involved,  by  reason  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  regime  of  the  wholesale  industry,  which 
they  alone  would  be  able  to  solve  conformably  to  their 
interests.  Thus  the  liberalism  of  the  ruling  oligarchy 
and  the  aspirations  of  the  new  middle-class  combined  to 
carry  the  Reform  Law  of  1832.  It  was  not  a  democratic 
reform:  the  middle-class  alone  secured  the  right  to  vote 
along  with  a  legitimate  influence  in  the  direction  of  the 
country's  affairs.  But  an  initial  breach  was  opened  in 
the  old-fashioned  system  of  the  distribution  of  political 
power:  through  this  breach,  in  the  course  of  time  and 
thanks  to  the  progress  of  the  individualist  movement, 
the  whole  people  was  destined  to  pass. 

Up  to  that  time  the  people  had  been  willing  to  accept 
their  fate  which  amounted,  politically,  to  non-existence, 
and  often,  in  other  directions,  to  misery  and  degradation. 
The  minority  which  took  part  in  the  revolutionary  move- 
ment, known  under  the  name  of  Chartism,  was  not  very 
considerable.  There  was  no  union  in  England  as  in 
France,  of  the  middle-classes  and  popular  masses,  at  critical 
moments,  for  armed  revolt  in  the  streets  or  resistance  on 
the  frontier.  The  middle-class  followed  its  own  evolution. 
The  populace,  less  prompt  than  ours  to  translate  its 
feelings  into  action,  made  very  few  attempts  to  make  its 
weight  felt  in  the  State.  The  rare  insurrections,  or  rather 
noisy  manifestations,  were  severely  repressed.  The  in- 
dividualist movement  which,  in  the  initial  rush,  had  carried 
the  middle-class  into  power,  was  to  penetrate  very  slowly 
as  deep  as  the  lower  strata  of  society.  Meanwhile,  the 
victors  of  1832  organized  themselves  for  the  purpose  of 
increasing  their  influence,  their  means  of  action,  and  their 


158         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

chances  of  success.  In  conquering  their  "place  in  the 
sun"  they  expended  an  energy  which  was  not  exempt  from 
harshness  and  which  did  not  sufficiently  resist  the  sugges- 
tions of  selfishness.  Not,  indeed,  that  they  were  devoid 
of  pity:  their  charity,  which  they  called  philanthropy, 
manifested  itself  in  praiseworthy  efforts  to  alleviate  the 
ills  of  poverty.  But  they  were  too  absorbed  in  the 
magnificent  and  arduous  task  of  subjecting  the  forces 
of  nature  to  the  will  of  man,  of  creating  the  machinery  of 
production,  of  multiplying  the  means  of  communication, 
and  of  founding  financial  establishments  ...  to  be  dis- 
turbed about  the  material  and  moral  situation  of  the 
workingman.  They  had  their  own  particular  doctrine. 
They,  the  men  who  had  paid  little  heed  to  the  idealistic 
rationalism  which  had  come  from  France,  allowed  them- 
selves to  be  seduced  by  a  utilitarian  rationalism  which 
appeared  in  England  in  due  season  to  serve  their  interests. 
The  philosophy  of  Jeremy  Bentham,  a  doctrine  of  radical 
individualism  and  uncompromising  utilitarianism,  became 
the  catechism  of  their  party. 

Bentham  and  the  utilitarian  radicals  had  in  mind 
only  one  of  the  principles  of  the  French  Revolution,  namely, 
liberty;  moreover  they  applied  it  with  an  inflexible  rigour 
to  the  constitution  of  the  industrial  society.  The  desire 
for  liberty  did  not  mean  for  them,  as  it  did  for  Jean- 
Jacques  Rousseau  and  the  French  individualists,  an 
emotional  aspiration  guided  by  a  rational  ideal  ...  a 
passion  sustained  by  a  conviction.  Their  doctrine  was 
not  a  doctrine  of  revolt  conceived  in  tumult  and  borne 
onward  by  a  powerful  wave  of  imperious  desire.  It 
was  a  doctrine  of  organization,  of  a  cold  and  positive 
order,  begotten  of  a  new  spirit  which  was  beginning  to 
overtake  the  century  .  .  .  the  scientific  spirit.  The 
notion  of  law,  which  the  chemists,  the  physicists,  and 
naturalists  were  establishing  more  and  more  solidly  in 


Individualism  and  " State-ism"         159 

the  domain  of  concrete  phenomena,  was  penetrating  into 
the  domain  of  moral  and  social  phenomena.  Did  not 
ethics,  the  science  of  human  conduct,  and  political  econ- 
omy, the  science  of  productive  organization,  have  their 
particular  mechanism  set  in  movement  by  a  few  simple 
initial  forces?  Let  these  forces  be  discovered,  let  their 
law  be  formulated,  and  then  it  would  be  possible  to  elimi- 
nate the  obstacles  maladroitly  raised  by  human  ignorance 
and  to  rectify  the  deviations  introduced  by  empiricism. 

A  new  form  of  society  was  shaping  itself :  the  industrial 
society.  Was  it  to  be  left  to  develop  itself  haphazard 
at  the  risk  of  paralysing  the  rich  promises  already  an- 
nounced? Bentham  thought  that  he  had  discovered 
the  law  of  the  new  economic  and  social  order  in  the 
individualistic  principle  of  "interest."  .  .  .  Individuals 
are  actuated  by  their  interest:  the  interests  of  each  in 
coming  into  collision,  neutralize  each  other;  whence 
results  a  harmony  which  is  the  basis  of  order  and  the 
source  of  all  prosperity.  Let  the  social  organization, 
then,  allow  individual  interests  full  liberty  to  manifest 
and  exercise  themselves;  the  resulting  energies  will  be 
stimulated  to  the  highest  degree  and  the  productive  ca- 
pacity raised  to  the  maximum.  The  very  struggle  itself 
will  be  an  element  of  vigour  and  success:  it  cannot  de- 
generate into  anarchy,  for  order  is  a  law  of  nature,  and 
one  may  count  upon  human  intelligence,  under  the  spur 
of  suffering,  to  discover  the  modes  of  social  harmony 
consistent  with  universal  harmony.  Hence,  just  as  in 
nature,  forces  so  balance  each  other  that  they  produce 
the  magnificent  bloom  of  life,  so,  in  the  economic  order  if 
the  forces  of  capital  and  labour,  of  desire  and  need  are 
allowed  to  operate  without  untimely  intervention,  the 
equilibrium  will  establish  itself  for  the  greater  good  of 
progress.  Let  there  be  no  Government  interference  in 
questions  of  production  and  exchange  .  .  .  liberty  for  all 


i6o         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

is  the  best  means  of  securing  happiness  for  all.  If  tempo- 
rary sufferings  result  from  its  application  they  are  only 
secondary  ills,  not  at  all  to  be  compared  with  the  immense 
benefits  of  liberty.  Whence  the  formula:  laisser  faire, 
laisser  passer. 

In  the  name  of  the  new  science,  ponticax  economy, 
the  new  school  rejected  all  legislative  measures,  all  media- 
tion between  masters  and  workingmen,  all  protection  of 
commerce  by  means  of  premiums  or  custom  duties,  and 
all  tutelage  of  the  individual  under  cover  of  protection 
or  assistance.  The  Government  was  to  be  reduced  to  the 
minimum  r61e  or  defender  of  property  and  life,  in  foreign 
as  well  as  domestic  matters.  Such  was  the  programme  of 
the  utilitarian  economists  and  radical  individualists  from 
1840  to  1860. 

Individualism  as  thus  defined  enjoys  nowadays,  in  the 
minds  of  most,  an  unenviable  reputation  because  it  is 
held  responsible,  not  without  reason,  for  the  miserable 
condition  of  the  majority  of  the  working  class  towards 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century.  In  effect,  while 
its  principle  was  just,  its  application  was  perverted  and 
furthermore  its  uncomprising  attitude  was  inadmissible. 
In  the  first  place  its  application  was  perverted:  for,  in 
order  that  free  competition  might  result  in  an  equitable 
equilibrium,  the  contending  forces  should  have  been 
perceptibly  equal  and  should  have  operated  under  condi- 
tions equally  favourable.  Now,  to  take  the  most  striking 
case,  the  conflict  between  employers  and  employees,  the 
latter  found  themselves  abandoned,  crushed  by  their 
poverty,  pressed  hard  by  hunger,  and  placed  at  a  dis- 
advantage by  their  ignorance  and  isolation  vis-a-vis 
an  organization  of  masters,  supported  by  capital,  social 
prestige,  middle-class  solidarity,  superiority  of  intel- 
ligence, and  technical  ability.  The  right  of  association,  at 
least,  should  have  been  granted  to  the  workingmen :  and 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         161 

yet,  in  that  direction  the  law  set  up  all  sorts  of  restrictions. 
...  In  the  second  place,  radical  individualism  failed 
in  its  purpose  because  of  its  uncompromising  attitude. 
.  .  .  Now,  in  human  concerns,  there  are  probably  no 
simple  principles  which  are  wholly  true.  In  all  questions, 
truth  is  found  at  about  equal  distance  between  the  ex- 
tremes, and  justice  resides  in  an  even  poise  of  principles, 
of  modes  of  action,  and  of  legislative  measures  which 
counterbalance  each  other.  Radical  individualism,  then, 
represented  only  a  part  of  the  truth  of  which  the  counter- 
part had  still  to  be  found.  It  emphasized  initiative, 
energy,  enterprise,  and  all  the  qualities  which  the  English- 
man includes  in  the  word  self-help;  but  it  neglected  the 
duties  of  assistance  and  succour  which  the  privileged 
of  fortune,  intelligence,  and  education  owe  to  the  dis- 
inherited; it  disregarded  one  of  the  essential  r61es  of  the 
State,  namely,  the  protection  of  the  feeble  and  vanquished 
in  the  battle  of  fate  and  the  battle  of  life.  Henceforth, 
in  the  face  of  uncompromising  and  unilateral  individual- 
ism, the  "social"  conception  of  collective  life  was  destined 
to  take  its  course — this  was  the  movement  which  certain 
sociologists  call  the  collectivist  movement,  by  reason  of 
the  importance  accorded  to  the  collectivity,  but  which, 
in  order  to  avoid  confusion  with  the  same  epithet  used  by 
the  revolutionary  school,  it  is  perhaps  preferable  to  call 
the  "solidarist"  movement. 

In  England,  the  solidarist  movement  was  not  associated 
from  the  start,  as  in  France,  with  the  democratic  move- 
ment. While  the  proletary  was  feeling  its  way,  uncertain, 
between  political  agitation  and  social  agitation,  the  con- 
servative aristocracy,  against  which  the  Reform  of  1832 
had  been  carried,  rallied  of  its  own  accord  to  a  policy  of 
Government  intervention  in  favour  of  the  workingmen. 
The  aristocracy  adopted  this  policy  partly  through 


162         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

jealousy  of  the  manufacturing  class  of  which  it  had 
become  the  political  rival,  partly  through  fidelity  to  the 
tradition  of  solicitude  towards  their  dependents  observed 
by  the  great  land-owners  and  partly  through  religious 
sentiment,  or  the  humane  sentiment  of  duty  towards  the 
unfortunate.  Thus  the  paternal  benevolence  of  the  feudal 
lord,  the  charitable  devotion  of  the  Christian,  and  the 
sense  of  actual  necessities,  united,  under  the  shock  of 
contemporary  events,  to  form  a  new  sentiment  of  social 
duty  and  a  new  policy  of  social  reform.  The  immediate 
cause  of  this  was  the  desire  to  oppose  to  the  democratic 
policy  of  the  Liberals  a  policy  of  political  protection  and 
intervention  which  could  rally  the  masses.  The  under- 
lying cause  was  the  dumb  anger  of  the  people,  goaded  by 
hunger  and  obscurely  wrought  upon  by  the  political  and 
social  forces  set  in  motion  by  the  French  Revolution. 
The  political  force — derived  from  the  "Rights  of  Man"- 
had  determined  the  Chartist  movement — a  democratic 
demand  for  a  "People's  Charter"  advocated  by  a  hand- 
ful of  revolutionists.  The  social  force — derived  from  the 
great  hope  of  a  better  state  of  life  conceived  for  a  moment 
by  the  French  people,  was,  in  fact,  the  more  active  of  the 
two;  it  acted  upon  the  whole  mass  of  the  people  who  were, 
however,  incapable  of  expressing  it  in  a  programme. 

A  few  men  of  the  Tory  party  understood  the  situation ; 
a  more  intelligent  policy  might  be  pursued  than  that  of 
repressing  by  force  the  revolutionary  efforts  of  the  dis- 
satisfied. It  was  clear  that  throughout  all  Europe,  a 
movement  of  impatience  was  stirring  the  masses.  The 
revolution  of  1848  in  France,  which  from  democratic 
had  become  socialist  in  character,  might  well  lead  to  fear 
that  the  contagion  would  reach  England.  ...  It  was  at 
this  juncture,  that  men  like  Lord  Shaftesbury,  an  in- 
fluential nobleman  and  fervent  Christian,  and  Carlyle,  a 
moralist  well  versed  in  the  Bible  and  an  historian  who  was 


Individualism  and  " State-ism"          163 

unwilling  to  forget  the  social  lesson  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, preached  a  crusade  of  intervention  and  set  England 
on  the  path  to  social  legislation.  The  first  measures  of  the 
solidarist  policy,  then,  were  the  work  of  the  Conservatives : 
the  protection  of  the  workingman  originated  with  the 
upper  classes.  The  movement,  however,  although  it  did 
not  proceed  from  the  people,  possessed  an  individualistic 
character  which  distinguished  it  from  German  socialism 
of  the  "State-ist"  type.  It  prepared  the  great  work  of 
today :  the  emancipation  of  the  people  by  the  people. 

Thus,  to  the  illiberal  rationalism  of  the  economists  and 
radicals,  who  neglected  the  fact  of  poverty  and  deliber- 
ately set. aside  all  consideration  of  sentiment,  the  Socialist- 
Tories  (as  they  were  called)  opposed  two  forces  of  the 
past  which  they  wished  to  revive  and  adapt  to  present 
necessities:  human  sympathy  and  the  sentiment  of 
national  union.  Their  action  was  powerful  and  fruitful 
because  they  had  understood  that  the  most  pressing  need 
of  the  moment  was  to  counterbalance  the  mechanical 
rigidity  and  doctrinal  egoism  of  the  Manchester  School 
by  an  antagonistic  force,  capable  of  re-establishing  the 
equilibrium.  The  hard  law  of  competition,  the  cast-iron 
law  of  supply  and  demand,  the  implacable  precept: 
"Each  for  himself:  help  yourself!  ..."  were  tempered 
with  the  new  sentiment  of  the  responsibility  of  society 
towards  its  members  and  by  the  new  notion  of  the  organic 
unity  of  the  collectivity  ...  in  such  sort  that  a  part  may 
suffer  or  die  from  the  suffering  or  death  of  the  other 
parts.  ...  Of  this  doctrine,  so  full  of  promise  for  the 
future,  Carlyle  was  the  interpreter. 

In  the  name  of  social  duty,  he  demanded  that  the 
' '  captain  of  industry  "  should  make  it  his  concern  to  obtain 
for  the  manual  labourer  at  least  a  minimum  of  the  material 
comfort  without  which  human  dignity  is  not  possible. 
Upon  this  foundation  of  health,  of  modest  competency,  of 


164         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

restricted  suffering,  of  muscle-free  exercise  and  a  little 
leisure,  the  State  and  the  initiative  of  the  cultivated 
class  should  construct  the  moral  development  of  the 
workingman  by  means  of  instruction,  education,  and 
outdoor  exercise  in  the  sunlight.  In  the  name  of  national 
solidarity,  then,  let  the  "collectivity"  organize  with  a 
view  to  employing  all  the  vital  forces  of  the  nation  and 
protecting  the  workingman  against  the  accidents  and  ills 
of  industry,  with  a  view  to  preventing  the  cruel  shock  of 
man's  goodwill  against  the  relentless  barrier  of  poverty, 
unemployment,  and  the  payment  of  a  life  of  labour  in  the 
miserable  coin  of  old  age,  want,  and  decrepitude.  The 
whole  social  programme,  whose  realization  was  to  last 
through  the  nineteenth  and  part  of  the  twentieth  centuries, 
lies  exposed  in  its  main  tendencies  in  the  work  of  Thomas 
Carlyle.  It  was  not,  however,  through  the  means  particu- 
larly favoured  by  Carlyle  that  the  reform  was  to  be 
finally  accomplished.  The  socialistic  toryism  of  the 
author  of  the  Latter  Day  Pamphlets  differs  profoundly 
from  the  socialistic  radicalism  of  today.  The  under- 
standing of  this  difference  will  be  a  step  towards  preparing 
us  to  understand  what  distinguishes  English  individualistic 
socialism  from  German  state-made  socialism. 

Carlyle  has  no  confidence  in  democracy.  He  writes 
at  an  epoch  when  democracy,  struggling  for  existence,  is 
feeling  its  way  by  efforts  which  an  observer  ill-disposed 
in  its  favour  might  consider  as  chaotic.  Democracy, 
even  matured  by  experience,  remains  in  other  respects 
tainted  with  defects,  which  its  enlightened  partisans 
do  not  dissimulate  and  which,  besides  numerous  correc- 
tions, will  no  doubt  need  the  slow  process  of  time  and 
perhaps  the  wisdom  born  of  great  suffering  before  approxi- 
mate rectification.  All  Carlyle 's  criticisms  respecting 
the  ignorance  of  the  masses,  the  blight  of  corruption,  the 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         165 

moral  low-water  mark  of  electors  and  elected,  the  out- 
bidding and  fawning,  the  plague  of  parliamentary  loqua- 
city .  .  .  still  hold  good  today.  But  he  has  no  eye 
except  for  the  dark  side  of  things  and  never  stops  a  mo- 
ment to  ask  himself  whether  the  apparent  disorder,  the 
desperate  and  violent  struggles,  and  then  the  waste  of 
words  and  ideas  are  not  after  all  signs  of  life.  Liberty 
has  its  fashions  which  entail  secondary  evils  but  forfend 
the  irreparable  disaster  of  the  subjection  of  souls  to  a 
despotic  authority  or  to  a  tyrannical  idea.  "  At  bottom, 
Carlyle  is  in  favour  of  a  strong  authority,  sufficiently 
justified  in  his  eyes,  if  it  remains,  what  was  called  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  "enlightened."  He  wrote  a  lengthy 
work  in  praise  of  Frederick  II,  the  founder  of  Prussian 
militarism  and  Prussian  imperialism.  Fondness  for 
order,  administrative  skill,  devotion  to  public  welfare, 
talent  for  creating  an  atmosphere  of  mute  and  humble 
obedience  .  .  .  such  qualities  prevented  Carlyle  from  dis- 
cerning this  Monarch's  rapacity,  duplicity,  and  cynicism. 
Moreover,  the  veritable  hero  in  his  eyes,  the  born  leader, 
the  man  predestined  to  command,  in  view  of  the  salvation 
of  mankind,  is  Cromwell,  that  is  to  say  not  only  the 
"enlightened  despot, "  but  the  "moral  despot, "  the  King- 
Priest  who,  through  the  exterior  discipline  of  law,  prepares 
the  human  conscience  for  the  interior  discipline  of  good. 
Carlyle  is  of  Calvinist  origin;  the  moral  fanaticism  of 
his  faith  colours  his  political  doctrine.  This  overshooting 
trust  in  authority — in  which,  moreover,  there  is  an  element 
of  the  spirit  of  contradiction,  an  element  of  unpleasant 
sourness,  and  even  an  element  of  whimsical  humour — 
represents  the  crumbling  part  of  his  system.  Never- 
theless, when  one  compares  it  with  the  system  which 
Treitschke  has  inculcated  in  Germany  and  which  prevails 
today  in  that  country,  one  must  recognize  that  Carlyle  con- 
tests the  benefits  of  political  liberty  only  for  the  purpose 


166         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

of  making  surer  of  the  triumph  of  moral  liberty.  The 
liberty  of  vote,  of  haranguing  in  public  meetings  and  of 
manifesting  in  the  street,  appears  to  him  of  doubtful 
benefit,  at  least  for  the  simple  man  whom  he  believes  still 
incapable  of  thinking  for  himself,  of  judging  of  the  signifi- 
cance of  his  own  decisions,  or  of  criticizing  Government 
measures.  Notwithstanding  this,  he  sets  forth  the  lead- 
ing principles  of  moral  individualism,  that  is  to  say 
the  means  of  liberating  the  soul,  with  a  nobleness  and 
breadth  which  place  him  in  the  front  rank  of  the  great 
moralists.  The  preaching  of  his  whole  life  consists  in 
humbling  pride,  in  condemning  cupidity,  and  in  stigmatiz- 
ing the  lie.  What  a  cruel  awakening  would  be  his,  were 
it  his  lot  to  live  with  us  once  more,  to  see  the  German 
people,  in  whom  he  had  faith,  because  of  Kant  and 
Goethe  and  its  virtue  of  silent  obedience,  rush  headlong, 
furiously,  shamelessly,  into  the  vices  which  he  most 
abhorred — pride,  cupidity,  falsehood !  He  would  straight- 
way recognize  that  what  was  best  in  his  own  doctrine, 
was  not  the  advocacy  of  authority  and  hero-worship — 
because  the  hero,  in  spite  of  his  genius,  may  err,  and 
because  authority  which  shackles  intelligence,  obstructs 
the  free  flow  of  ideas — but  the  glorification  of  moral 
individualism  which  maintained  the  spirit  of  criticism 
active  within  him  and  led  him  to  set  forth  the  principles 
whereby  modern  man  is  to  remain  faithful  to  the  humane 
ideal  established  by  ancient  wisdom  and  Christian  virtue. 

The  German  nation  would  have  disappointed  Carlyle: 
it  has  painfully  disappointed  all  those  who,  in  spite  of 
Bismarck  and  his  zealots,  hoped  for  a  renaissance  of  the 
traditions  of  the  great  epoch,  for  a  return  to  the  sources  of 
thought  which  flowed  so  abundant  and  rich,  for  Germany 
and  the  world,  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
Kant  had  recapitulated  all  the  ethics  of  transcendentalism 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         167 

in  a  social  precept  worthy  of  becoming  the  watchword 
of  future  reformers:  "The  individual  ought  not  to  be 
treated  as  a  means  but  an  end";  that  is  to  say:  it  is  not 
permissible  for  man  to  make  use  of  his  fellowman  as  of  an 
instrument;  every  individual,  whatever  be  his  condition, 
is  a  moral  person  potentially  or  in  act,  who,  in  the  name 
of  the  innate  dignity  of  mind  has  right  to  our  respect  or 
to  our  solicitude.  Goethe,  in  the  more  matured  and 
beautiful  of  his  works,  in  Faust,  in  the  second  Wilhelm 
Meister,  and  in  his  Conversations  with  Eckermann,  had 
already  expressed  the  substance  of  modern  wisdom,  such 
as  it  ought  to  be  formulated  on  the  morrow  of  the  tumul- 
tuous and  disordered  epoch  of  Romanticism. 

Goethe  had  understood  that  Romanticism  was  a 
psychological  deformation  essentially  German.  Romanti- 
cism, when  considered  as  an  attitude  towards  life,  is  a 
disproportioned  aspiration  of  the  finite  being  to  espouse 
the  infinite,  a  dream  which  bewilders  reason  and  perturbs 
the  will.  Faust  soars  upward  to  conquer  the  boundless 
region  of  fancy,  stretching  his  desire  to  the  poetry  and 
prose  of  existence,  to  the  joys  of  the  spirit  and  the  pleasures 
of  the  senses,  to  the  verities  of  science  and  art  and  to  the 
secrets  of  the  other  world.  He  lends  an  ear  to  the  cynical 
and  scoffing  voice  that  counsels  him  to  trample  underfoot 
the  moral  laws,  the  cherished  tradition  of  things  revered, 
the  instinctive  nobleness  and  acquired  prudence  which 
religion,  philosophy,  and  rectitude  have  opposed,  from 
antiquity  down  to  the  tumultuous  elans  and  immoder- 
ate appetites  of  the  Ego.  Finally,  Faust,  disabused  and 
scourged,  recovers,  little  by  little,  in  the  school  of  ancient 
grandeur  and  Christian  charity  his  sense  of  equilibrium 
and  finds  serenity  in  the  spirit  of  abnegation,  in  the 
sacrifice  of  desire  to  the  law  of  moderation,  and  in  the 
absorption  of  the  Ego's  energies  in  labours  of  Catholic 
interest.  The  tragedy  of  Faust  is  the  secret  tragedy 


i68         Individualism  and  " State-ism" 

of  the  soul  of  Goethe,  conquering  itself  through  will  and 
reason,  wresting  itself  from  the  fascination  of  Romanti- 
cism by  communion  with  the  best  of  human  thought, 
quickened  by  its  genius.  He  bequeathed  to  the  world 
the  secret  of  his  convalescence  in  the  ensemble  of  intel- 
lectual and  moral  precepts,  which  according  to  his  own 
expression  constitute  Culture. 

Between  the  wisdom  of  Goethe  and  the  so-called 
"enlightened"  despotism  of  the  masters  of  Prussia, 
Carlyle  believed  that  there  was  compatibility  and  possi- 
bility of  intimate  alliance.  The  pharisaism  of  Bismarck 
deceived  him  as  the  apparent  devotion  of  Frederick  the 
Great  to  the  public  weal  had  previously  deceived  him. 
In  reality  there  was  profound  variance  between  the  spirit 
of  Kant  and  Goethe  and  the  spirit  of  the  Prussian  mon- 
archy: the  latter  was  destined  to  kill  the  former.  ...  Is 
there  not  a  sign  of  the  spiritual  death  of  Germany  in  the 
manifesto  of  the  ninety-three  intellectuals  published  on 
the  morrow  of  the  Belgian  massacres  and  of  the  bombard- 
ment of  Reims,  denying  the  butcheries,  thefts,  and  de- 
struction, declaring  German  Kultur — not  Culture — one 
with  German  militarism,  and  basely  and  falsely  con- 
structing for  itself  a  rampart  with  the  names  of  Kant  and 
Goethe.  .  .  .  Kant  and  Goethe  who  would  have  dis- 
owned them  with  contempt?  No,  Kant  and  Goethe  no 
longer  belong  to  Germany,  guilty  of  collective  crime,  of 
national  frenzy,  and  intellectual  servility,  because  she  has 
denied  what  they  most  prized  .  .  .  moral  individualism 
and  liberty. 

When  Goethe  expressed  his  earnest  desire  for  the 
unification  of  Germany,  he  was  thinking  of  a  political 
union  capable  of  giving  more  cohesion  to  German  thought 
and  more  prestige  to  the  German  ideal,  but  incapable  of 
destroying  the  intellectual  and  moral  source  of  life  repre- 
sented by  particularism  of  tradition  and  custom.  Thanks 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         169 

to  the  variety  and  diversity  of  active  centres  within 
the  Fatherland,  the  Germanic  thought,  while  developing 
characters  properly  national,  would  remain  in  touch  with 
the  thought  of  humanity.  But  already,  even  in  his  time, 
national  exclusivism  was  growing.  The  humiliation  of 
Jena  had  provoked  the  movement  of  patriotic  revolt 
which  was  to  conduct  Prussia  to  the  revenge  of  1814  and 
1815  and  beyond  the  victory — to  the  laying  by  of  a  supply 
of  hatred  and  pride  as  well  as  to  the  fostering  of  a  savage 
fondness  for  war.  These  passions  were  reflected  in  the 
doctrines  of  the  time.  In  return,  these  doctrines  en- 
compassed the  passions  within  the  rigid  lines  of  theory 
and  stamped  them  with  their  intransigent  character. 
Fichte,  the  disciple  of  Kant,  who  had  been,  at  the  out- 
set, enamoured  of  the  dream  of  liberty  and  fraternity  of 
the  French  Revolution,  became,  after  1806,  an  ardent, 
impetuous  orator  of  national  awakening.  His  idealism 
shrunk  close  around  the  German  idea,  and,  from  its  original 
universal  character  developed  into  a  docile  instrument  of 
the  national  ambitions.  A  strange  servitude  of  thought, 
which  was  to  have  the  gravest  of  consequences  on  the 
German  philosophy!  For  this  people  of  metaphysicians, 
it  was  to  legitimize  a  policy  of  "state-ism,"  militarism, 
and  unscrupulous  imperialism  by  the  imposing  consecra- 
tion of  a  system. 

In  his  initial  attitude,  Fichte  amended  Jean-Jacques 
Rousseau  advantageously.  The  mainspring  of  indi- 
vidual life  should  no  longer  be  a  spirit  of  revolt  and  a 
wild  desire  for  independence,  which  would  reduce  social 
ties  to  their  simplest  expression,  but  a  moral  aspiration 
towards  the  full  expansion  of  the  spiritual  being,  realized 
by  the  co-operation  of  all,  in  a  strongly  organized  society. 
The  ideal  of  liberty  was  shifted  from  the  plane  of  personal 
action  to  the  plane  of  collective  action,  by  means  of  order, 
education,  and  discipline.  In  the  same  degree  that 


170         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

Rousseau  had  faith  in  the  natural  abilities  of  the  individ- 
ual and  leaned  consequently  towards  democracy,  Fichte 
was  on  guard  against  errors  overfrequent  with  the  in- 
dividual, ignorant,  and  blind,  and  leaned  towards  the 
authoritativeness  of  power  and  knowledge.  Up  to  that 
point,  his  doctrine  was  justifiable;  moreover  it  arrived 
opportunely  to  correct  the  excesses  of  revolutionary  in- 
dividualism. It  re-established  the  importance  of  the  social 
idea  and  gave  the  strength  of  cohesion  and  hierarchy  to 
miscellaneous  efforts;  it  was  liberal  in  nature  for  it  attri- 
buted authority,  not  to  the  strongest,  but  to  the  best. 
Nevertheless,  the  wave  of  fanaticism  liberated  by  the 
awakening  of  German  patriotism  troubled  the  sane  clear- 
ness of  this  idealism  and  perverted  its  application.  The 
desire  for  social  and  moral  progress  was  confined  solely 
to  the  German  people,  who  believing  themselves  hence- 
forth set  apart  from  the  world,  exalted  above  common 
humanity  through  their  lights  and  virtues,  entered  into  a 
latent  conflict  of  ideas  and  sentiments  with  their  neighbours, 
moulded  of  inferior  substance  and  worthy  of  contempt. 
The  German  people  became  the  people  elect,  the  people 
"from  ever"  the  Urvolk,  inspired  by  God  and  charged 
with  a  lofty  mission  of  civilization  among  the  impure  and 
bastard  races,  the  Mischvolker. 

Fichte's  successor  was  Hegel,  who,  outbidding  his  pre- 
decessor, imparted  to  the  German  doctrine  the  rigidity 
and  uncompromising  character  which  it  has  since  con- 
served. With  Hegel  is  to  be  noticed  the  expansion  of  two 
tendencies  of  the  German  mind  which  explain  both  its 
force  under  certain  favourable  conditions — for  example, 
when  a  420  millimeter  shell  falls  directly  on  the  cupola 
of  a  fort — and  its  weakness — for  example,  when  the  sledge- 
hammer blows  of  this  enormous  projectile  encounter  the 
supple  agility  of  a  living  object.  These  two  tendencies, 
which  correspond  to  a  predilection  for  the  colossal  and  for 


Individualism  and  " State-ism"         171 

theoretical  delusion  in  military  art,  represent,  in  the 
speculative  domain,  fondness  for  the  absolute  and  mystic 
illusion.  Instead  of  following  the  sinuous  lines  of  facts, 
of  adapting  themselves  to  the  anomalies  of  reality  and  of 
trying  to  find  an  equilibrium  between  extremes,  as  the 
French  do  with  facility,  thanks  to  their  clear  sense  of 
proportion,  and  as  the  English  do,  thanks  to  their  spirit 
of  compromise,  the  Germans  pursue  an  idea  to  the  last 
limit  of  reasoning  and  to  the  complete  exhaustion  of 
dialectic  expedients.  Having  reached  this  summum  of 
abstraction  where  the  nation  becomes  a  pure  concept, 
floating,  immaterial,  in  the  highest  heaven  of  transcen- 
dency, they  endow  it  with  a  superterrestrial  existence. 
Thus  an  idea,  a  mental  form,  a  category  in  which  is  sum- 
marized, for  the  convenience  of  speech,  an  aggregation  of 
concrete  facts,  assumes  in  their  eyes  a  mystic  reality  before 
which  the  intellect  remains  confounded,  but  which  ir- 
resistibly attracts  the  feelings  and  the  will.  It  is  by 
virtue  of  these  two  tendencies,  properly  Germanic,  that 
Hegel  exalts  the  notion  of  State  to  the  pinnacle  of  thought, 
deifies  it  and  crushes  the  individual  will  with  its  weight. 
The  individual  has  no  longer  any  value  as  such;  he  fully 
realizes  his  human  destiny  only  in  merging  with  the  social 
entity  which  attracts  him,  absorbs  him,  and  magnifies 
him.  In  presence  of  the  universality  of  the  State,  how 
paltry  the  particularity  of  the  individual  conscience  seems ! 
What  would  one  not  sacrifice  so  to  feel  his  personality 
growing,  ascending,  broadening  with  the  sum  of  the 
collective  energies  accumulated  in  the  stream  of  time,  by 
history  and  in  the  world  of  space,  by  national  unity? 
The  German,  then,  is  willing  to  suffer  eclipse  before  the 
authority  of  the  Emperor,  of  the  bureaucrat,  of  the  over- 
seer, or  of  the  corporal,  and  to  play  no  other  part  in  the 
immense  organism,  than  that  of  a  partial  man — of  a 
Teilmensch.  He  submits  to  regulations  which  reach  him 


172         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

even  in  his  private  life ;  he  suffers  the  yoke  of  a  humiliating 
and  brutal  military  discipline;  he  obtains  his  judgments 
and  ideas  from  the  top;  he  renounces  what  other  people 
call  political  rights;  he  exercises,  without  faltering,  at  the 
request  of  the  State,  the  functions  of  secret-agent  and 
spy;  he  feeds  upon  Kultur  and,  in  the  name  of  Kultur, 
at  the  order  of  his  leaders,  he  plunders,  ravishes,  and 
murders.  He  has  no  revolt  of  conscience,  because  his 
own  conscience  is  supplanted  by  the  code  of  civic  or 
military  duties  which  the  State  judges  expedient  to 
prescribe  for  him  in  all  circumstances  of  peace  or  war. 
What  remains  in  such  conduct  of  the  noble  Kantian 
doctrine  of  autonomy  and  of  the  eminent  dignity  of  the 
person  ? 

Hegel,  when  developing,  as  he  thought,  the  mystic  and 
dialectic  virtualities  of  the  philosophy  of  his  master,  Kant, 
suffered  in  reality  the  pressure  of  the  new  conditions  in 
which  the  history  of  Germany  evolved.  Germany,  con- 
scious of  her  force  and  irritated  at  seeing  this  force  squan- 
dered, useless  because  of  its  dispersion,  was  on  the  point 
of  throwing  herself  into  the  arms  of  Prussia,  who  was 
destined  to  accomplish  her  unity  by  iron  and  blood. 
Prussian  militarism  was  a  steel  spring  bent  for  action: 
Hegel's  doctrine  hollowed  the  groove  along  which  it  was 
able  to  act  and  to  arouse  the  inertia  of  the  country.  The 
idea  of  the  absolute  power  of  the  State  became  in  the 
hands  of  Bismarck  the  instrument  of  authority  and  disci- 
pline by  which  he  forged  German  unity.  The  mystic 
worship  of  the  State  was  applied  to  that  particular  attri- 
bute of  the  State  which  Bismarck  represented  to  it  as 
the  most  effective  and  the  most  productive  of  results, 
namely,  force.  It  was  thus  that  a  people  of  thinkers  and 
dreamers  fell,  by  reason  of  its  abdication  of  individual- 
ism, into  the  idolatry  of  national  prosperity  due  to  the 
administrative  and  industrial  machinery  and  into  the 


Individualism  and  " State-ism"         173 

passion  of  haughty  and  brutal  supremacy  brought  about 
by  a  military  machine. 

Beyond  the  frontiers  of  this  people,  the  world  has  pro- 
gressed .  The  social  ideal  expressed  by  Fichte  has  developed 
in  England  and  France  in  harmony  with  and  not  at  the 
expense  of  the  individualistic  ideal,  so  as  to  encourage, 
by  means  which  the  new  conditions  of  life  imposed  more 
and  more,  the  integral  development  of  the  human  person. 
The  gulf  has  widened  more  and  more  between  French  and 
English  thought  on  the  one  hand  and  German  thought 
on  the  other.  The  complexity  of  internal  problems  and 
external  relations,  absorbing  our  people's  attention  and 
efforts,  has  prevented  some  from  measuring  its  depth;  the 
profundity  of  this  cleft  is  becoming  evident  today. 

It  is  now  our  purpose  to  indicate  in  what  manner  the 
compromise  between  individualism  and  socialism  was 
established  in  England  from  1860  down  to  the  present, 
and  in  what  manner,  under  the  shock  of  events,  the 
contrast  between  English  and  German  thought  widened. 
.  .  .  This  contrast  makes  the  war  of  today  not  only  a 
conflict  of  interests  but  also  a  conflict  of  ideas  in  which  the 
progress  and  civilization  of  humanity  are  at  stake. 

Second  Part  (1867-1914) 

The  history  of  politics  and  of  political  ideas  in  Eng- 
land, from  1860  to  the  present  day,  consists  mainly 
in  tracing  in  what  way,  under  favour  of  the  notion 
of  national  solidarity,  a  new  form  of  individualism  was 
established — a  more  fecund,  because  more  organic,  form 
which  tended  to  realize  the  social  equilibrium  without 
exhausting  the  individual  sources  of  thought  and  action. 

The  first  social  reforms  such  as  protection  of  women  and 
children  in  factories  and  mines,  reduction  of  the  hours  of 
work,  laws  on  the  hygiene  of  workshops  and  on  trade- 


174         Individualism  and  " State-ism" 

unions,  were  found  to  coincide  with  a  period  of  economic 
prosperity  and  high  salaries.  Under  the  beneficent  action 
of  the  new  legislation  and  the  appeasing  action  of  a  better 
scale  of  living,  the  disaffection  of  the  working  classes 
disappeared;  for  a  period  of  twenty  years,  the  solution 
of  the  political  and  social  problem  proceeded  in  peace  and 
goodwill. 

The  Liberal  party,  faithful  to  the  traditions  which  had 
founded  its  greatness,  remained  attached  to  the  doctrine 
of  self-help  and  leaned  more  and  more  towards  the  natural 
consequences  of  this  doctrine — democracy.  But,  being 
carried  away  by  the  new  current  of  solidarist  feeling,  the 
Liberal  party  disengaged  itself  insensibly  from  un- 
compromising individualism  after  the  manner  of  Bentham, 
who  wished  to  leave  individuals  alone,  face  to  face,  in  the 
arena  of  competition.  One  may  follow  the  transformation 
which  was  effected  in  the  midst  of  the  party  by  studying 
the  conversion  of  one  of  its  most  eminent  members,  the 
philosopher  John  Stuart  Mill.  Mill  had  been  reared  by 
his  father  in  the  pure  tradition  of  scientific  economy. 
What  he  saw  in  social  activity  was  only  a  set  of  ineluctable 
laws  and  blind  forces  of  which  men  were  the  necessary 
agents.  In  his  mind  morals  amounted  to  an  arithmetic 
in  which  interests,  dissociated  from  persons,  were  com- 
bined like  numbers.  The  inter-relationship  of  man  to 
man  appeared  in  his  eyes  under  the  form  of  equations 
which  scientific  economy  taught  one  to  solve  in  the 
.algebraic  fashion.  Individuals,  in  order  to  play  their 
r61e  in  this  system  of  mathematics,  should  be  free,  in  the 
political  and  economical  sense  of  the  word,  that  is  to 
say,  be  able  to  embody,  without  hindrances,  the  social 
force  which  chance  has  had  them  represent.  The  effect 
of  this  doctrine  upon  the  character  of  the  young  John 
Stuart  was,  as  he  tells  us  in  his  Autobiography,  to  plunge 
him  at  twenty  years  of  age  into  the  most  sombre  pessi- 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         175 

mism.  The  emotional  influences  which  he  assimilated  in 
the  contemporary  environment  saved  him.  Everywhere 
around  him  the  social  and  moral  conscience  was  awaken- 
ing. He  read  the  poets  Wordsworth  and  Coleridge  who 
exalted  the  power  of  duty  and  the  beauty  of  sympathy. 
Carlyle  taught  him  the  splendour  of  voluntary  effort, 
the  joy  of  struggling  against  the  mechanism  of  blind  forces, 
and  the  supreme  satisfaction  of  sacrifice.  He  under- 
stood that  besides  economic  and  political  liberty,  which 
has  its  function,  there  were  moral  liberty  and  moral  elan 
which  have  their  functions  too.  He  came  to  believe 
that  man  is  not  the  product  of  circumstances  but  that  he 
may,  by  an  effort  of  will,  break  the  encircling  ring  of  steel 
and  become  in  part  the  author  of  his  destiny.  And  so 
he  was  seized  with  the  new  joy  of  feeling,  desiring,  and 
hoping.  The  prison  of  fatalism,  the  whitened  sepulchre 
of  his  youth,  crumbled  utterly  away.  What  is  sombre 
in  the  condition  of  man,  tossed  about  in  the  currents  and 
eddies  of  cause  and  effect,  condemned  to  an  endless 
struggle  for  some  unknown  end,  "vanished  out  of  his 
sight;  he  saw  himself  a  free  man,  capable,  through  the 
union  of  reason  and  love,  of  removing  social  fatalities 
and  of  preparing  a  better  fortune.  ...  It  was  birth 
into  a  new  life." 

Individualism  assumed  a  new  value  in  his  eyes.  Liberty 
remained  the  precious  acquisition  which  modern  civiliza- 
tion had  conquered  over  despotism;  but  it  was  not  only  a 
negative  good,  it  was  a  means  in  view  to  an  end.  The 
individual,  finally  enlightened  on  the  solidarity  which 
unites  him  to  his  fellowmen  and  guided  by  the  sentiment 
of  sympathy,  is  to  seek  the  development  of  his  personality 
not  only  for  himself,  but  also  for  others.  He  is  no  longer 
to  throw  himself  blindly  into  a  m$lee,  the  conditions 
of  which  are  supposed  to  be  determined  by  the  fatalism 
of  the  laws  of  nature.  He  will  learn  in  sounding  his 


176         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

conscience,  in  taking  counsel  of  his  heart,  in  looking 
around  him  with  a  clearer  look,  that  the  modes  of  human 
life  do  not  correspond  servilely  to  the  modes  of  the  law 
of  things.  Man  will  be  able  to  act  upon  himself,  upon 
his  fellows,  and  upon  the  framework  of  existence.  The 
r61e  of  the  social  philosopher,  of  the  statesman,  of  any 
man  who  thinks,  will  be,  then,  to  discover  the  means 
of  bettering  the  environment,  whence  depends  in  part 
the  amelioration  of  the  individual.  Thus  through  the 
notion  of  liberty,  John  Stuart  Mill  reaches  a  solidarist  con- 
ception of  society. 

The  case  of  conscience  of  this  philosopher,  who  began 
his  spiritual  life  as  a  disciple  of  Bentham  and  who  left  a 
posthumous  work  inspired  by  socialist  principles,  is  the 
case  of  numerous  Liberals.  His  conversion  is  the  sign 
of  a  movement  of  thought  which,  in  the  following  years, 
assumed  an  extension  almost  universal.  At  the  same  time 
the  Conservatives,  who  had  initiated  the  movement  of 
the  century  towards  solidarism,  drew  nearer  to  democracy. 
This  rallying,  it  is  true,  was  less  the  effect  of  a  sincere 
conviction  than  of  a  skilful  political  manoeuvre.  Disraeli, 
who  assumed  the  power  as  leader  of  the  Tories,  in  1867, 
feeling  that  the  democratic  reform  was  imminent,  wished 
to  confer  on  his  party  the  honour  of  making  a  beau  geste 
in  favour  of  the  people;  he  had  voted  the  passage  of  a 
Bill  of  suffrage  extension,  which  raised  all  householders  to 
the  dignity  of  electors.  The  effect  of  the  Bill  was  to  open 
the  franchise  to  the  great  majority  of  the  workingmen 
of  the  towns.  It  will  be  easily  understood  how  this  master- 
stroke of  the  Conservatives  won  them,  for  a  time,  the 
sympathy  of  the  lower  classes. 

This  alliance  was,  however,  of  short  duration.  Ulterior 
developments  so  shaped  themselves  that,  as  a  result  of 
political  events  which  it  is  useless  to  recall,  democracy 
and  socialism  encountered  each  other  and  presently 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         177 

united  in  a  single  current  destined  to  dominate  all  others 
in  the  internal  history  of  England.  The  people  were  not 
backward  in  increasing  still  more  their  share  of  power. 
The  electoral  law  of  1884  completed  the  law  of  1867  by  a 
new  extension  of  the  suffrage.  Henceforth  the  lower 
class  was  master  of  its  destinies.  In  short  it  was  the 
people  who  established  progressively,  at  the  end  of  the 
nineteenth  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
turies, the  programme  of  social  democracy  which  is  being 
put  into  effect  today. 

But  the  term  "  Sozialdemokratie "  is  also  employed  in 
Germany.  The  word  "Liberalism,"  too,  is  of  current 
use  there  to  designate  one  of  the  parties  of  the  Assembly 
elected,  apparently,  by  universal  suffrage.  Can  it  be 
possible,  then,  that  there  is  any  parallelism  or  resemblance 
between  the  institutions  and  political  spirit  of  England 
and  Germany?  Despite  the  difference  in  moral  value 
between  the  two  peoples,  which  is  so  striking  today,  can 
it  be  possible  that  the  principles  of  collective  life  were  the 
'same  at  the  outset?  Such  a  possibility  is  unlikely,  and 
indeed  such  is  not  the  case.  Before  indicating  the  propor- 
tion of  individualism  and  genuine  liberty  to  be  found  in 
what  is  meant  by  democracy  and  socialism  in  England, 
let  us  stop  to  consider  what  is  hidden  under  appearances 
in  German  liberalism  and  German  socialism. 

Liberty  is  a  delicate  plant  which  does  not  grow  in  a  soil 
artificially  prepared  to  receive  it.  It  flourishes  only  in  a 
nation  possessing  traditions  like  England,  or  which,  by  the 
force  and  elasticity  of  its  psychical  faculties,  like  France, 
is  capable  of  creating  itself  a  new  spiritual  being.  Now 
Germany  has  no  real  traditions ;  nor  has  she,  since  deliver- 
ing herself  to  Prussia,  any  psychical  individuality.  She  is 
a  nation  only  through  the  artificial  action  of  an  exterior 
force.  Bismarck,  who  made  Germany  in  order  to  serve 
the  interests  of  Prussia,  was  well  aware  that  the  union 


178         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

could  not  be  maintained  without  a  permanent  stimulus; 
and  so  he  deliberately  tore  Alsace-Lorraine  from  France 
to  engender  hatred  between  France  and  Germany,  and 
through  hatred  to  endow  German  unity  with  a  fictitious 
solidity.  The  existence  of  the  German  nation,  so  recent 
and  so  precarious,  is  the  result  of  force  and  is  kept  alive 
by  force.  Militarism  was  its  instrument  and  remains  its 
prop  and  pillar:  how  could  liberty  live  under  such  trap- 
pings? The  German  jurisconsults  are  well  aware  of 
the  situation:  "To  enjoy  a  political  activity  capable  of 
leading  to  success,"  says  one  of  them,  "the  German 
people,  by  reason  of  the  essence  of  its  character,  has  need  of 
being  directed  by  a  firm  authority  to  which  it  willingly 
submits  itself." 1 

There  were  German  Liberals  in  1848.  They  were  bold 
enough  to  form  a  revolutionary  committee  at  Heidelberg, 
and  over  the  Sovereigns'  heads  convoke  the  Parliament  of 
Frankfort.  This  Convention,  derisively  called  a  "con- 
venticle of  professors  and  ideologists, "  offered  the  title  of 
Emperor  to  the  King  of  Prussia,  Frederick- William  IV — 
who  haughtily  refused  "a  crown  of  wood  and  mud" 
at  the  hands  of  the  people.  In  his  own  kingdom,  however, 
the  same  Frederick  believed  it  prudent  to  grant  a  Constitu- 
tion (which  is  still  in  existence),  but  under  which  the 
Landtag  remains  under  control  of  a  small  group  of  country 
squires  and  financiers  allied  to  the  Crown.  In  swearing 
allegiance  to  the  Constitution,  the  King  added:  "In 
Prussia,  the  King  must  rule,  and  I  rule  because  it  is  the 
order  of  God."  His  great-nephew,  William,  when  ascend- 

1  Eichhorn,  Wahlrecht  und  Volksvertretung. — Cf.  Von  Bernhardi:  "There 
is  no  nation  so  little  qualified  as  Germany  to  direct  its  own  destinies.  .  .  . 
The  German  people  have  always  been  incapable  of  great  actions  for  the 
common  good,  except  under  the  stress  of  exterior  conditions  or  under  the 
leadership  of  powerful  personalities.  .  .  .  We  should,  then,  take  care  to 
guarantee  such  personalities  the  possibility  of  acting  with  confidence  and 
with  a  free  hand.  .  .  ."(Germany  and  the  Next  War.  1911). 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         179 

ing  the  imperial  throne,  was  to  repeat:  "I  am  God's 
Lieutenant  on  earth."  The  people,  through  the  double 
effect  of  their  passivity  and  of  their  mystic  tendencies, 
bowed  down  before  the  autocratic  will  of  the  Emperor 
in  an  attitude  of  respect  and  quasi-adoration.  .  .  .  Above 
all  else,  'the  Emperor  is  the  military  head :  no  party,  not 
even  the  Socialist  party,  has  ever  opposed  the  policy  of 
incessant  increase  of  the  armaments. 

Since  Germany  has  been  Prussianized,  liberalism  has 
perished  in  fact,  although  it  has  half  subsisted  in  name. 
The  epithet  that  describes  it  has  undergone  a  characteristic 
modification:  today  the  party  is  labelled  national-liberal, 
that  is  to  say  that  it  has  substituted  the  sentiment  of 
patriotism  (with  the  aggressive  character  which  it  is 
known  to  have  in  Germany)  for  the  sentiment  of  attach- 
ment to  liberty.  It  conserves  the  former  title  of  liberal 
only  through  the  effect  of  class  feeling,  to  mark  that  it 
unites  the  middle-class  in  opposition  to  the  landed  pro- 
prietors, and  the  interests  of  commerce  and  industry 
in  opposition  to  the  agrarian  interests.  The  Reichstag, 
where  this  party  sits  with  the  Agrarians,  the  Catholic 
Centre,  and  the  Socialists,  is  not  really  the  representative 
of  the  nation.  In  theory  the  mode  of  election  is  universal 
suffrage:  in  fact,  the  inequality  of  the  electoral  districts 
secures  the  advantage  to  the  upper  classes,  drugged  with 
militarism  and  jingoism  by  the  Gymnasiums  and  Uni- 
versities. Besides,  how  is  it  possible  for  the  national  will 
to  assert  itself  in  a  Parliament  which  has  not  the  initiative 
of  the  laws  and  which,  in  case  of  conflict,  is  obliged  to 
submit  to  the  executive.  The  Chancellor  and  the  Minis- 
ters, not  chosen  from  among  the  Parliament  and  not 
really  spokesmen  of  the  people,  but  functionaries  of  the 
Emperor,  are  not  subject  to  the  votes  of  the  deliberative 
Assembly.  Their  deftness,  in  general,  permits  them  to 
obtain  the  approval  of  their  bills  by  a  House  without 


i8o         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

genuine  personality;  but  even  when  conflicts  do  arise, 
they  remain  in  power  none  the  less  and  force  the  bills 
upon  a  new  House,  after  the  dissolution  of  the  refractory 
Assembly. 

The  German  people,  formerly  so  remarkable  for  its 
particularism  has  become  tainted  with  absolute  uniformity. 
All  opinions,  all  tendencies,  have  been  absorbed  by  the 
rising  tide  of  nationalism.  Political  rivalries,  class  an- 
tagonism suffer  eclipse  under  the  irresistible  pressure 
of  German  pride  and  German  ambition.  Just  as  the 
individuality  of  the  States  is  re-absorbed  into  the  Empire, 
so  the  individuality  of  the  classes  disappears  when  ques- 
tions of  Empire  are  at  stake.  Even  the  individuality  of 
the  conscience  bows  before  the  ruthless  imperative 
of  the  raison  d'Etat,  as  we  have  seen  in  the  case  of  the 
ninety-three  intellectuals,  who  dared  not  protest  even 
by  silence  against  the  crimes  of  the  soldiery,  committed  in 
obedience  to  orders.  With  a  sinister  unanimity,  the 
whole  people,  as  though  possessed  of  a  consuming  hunger, 
rushed  forward  to  adore  the  gods  of  material  prosperity 
and  force.  Incapable  of  keeping  alive  inwardly  the  liv- 
ing flame  of  idealism,  which  supposes  individual  activity, 
a  spirit  of  free  examination,  and  even  a  spirit  of  contradic- 
tion, having  unlearnt  spiritual  aspiration  which  can  only 
assert  itself  through  independence,  liberty,  and  diversity, 
the  people  abandoned  itself  to  the  machinery  of  system- 
atized and  hypertrophical  industry,  where  the  same 
qualities  are  called  for  as  triumph  in  the  machinery  of 
militarism.  Crushed  between  two  cog-wheel  systems, 
individualism,  with  all  that  constitutes  the  nobler  traits 
of  the  personality,  was  annihilated.  Science  was  no 
longer  cultivated  except  in  as  far  as  its  direct  applications 
place  man  in  possession  of  material  riches.  History 
itself  was  constrained  to  serve  the  ends  of  Germanism. 
Biology  was  put  on  the  rack  to  exalt  the  ' '  dolichocephalous 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         181 

fair-haired  race,"  the  predestined  victors  in  the  struggle 
for  pre-eminence.  Philosophy  had  no  other  office  than 
that  of  preparing  the  supremacy  of  Kultur.  All  the 
energies  of  the  nation,  under  the  pressure  of  opinion, 
the  ferule  of  the  school-master  and  the  semi-despotism 
of  the  Government,  were  bent  towards  the  unique  good 
of  securing  for  the  country  the  advantage  of  force  and 
making  individuals  the  instruments  of  force.  Even 
brutality  and  trickery  were  inculcated  as  a  means  of 
vanquishing  the  rivals  of  Germany  in  a  world  in  which 
they  noticed,  with  cynical  joy,  the  growth  of  the  senti- 
ments of  fraternity  and  humanity.  Indeed  this  gentle- 
ness of  manners  would  bring  other  peoples  more  rapidly 
into  their  power.  How  could  there  be  in  their  thought  or 
heart,  a  place  for  liberty  which  expresses  itself  imperfectly 
in  parliamentary  institutions,  but  which  notwithstanding, 
despite  pettiness  and  slackness,  nagging  and  botching, 
lives  therein  and  grows  apace,  and  in  the  hour  of  peril 
cements  the  people  into  an  indestructible  union,  because 
it  is  a  union  of  free  consciences. 

Without  the  institutions  of  liberty,  without  even  the 
desire  for  liberty,  how  was  it  possible  for  socialism  in 
Germany  to  acquire  the  same  democratic  and  individualis- 
tic character  which  it  presents  in  England  and  in  France? 
With  German  workmen  the  socialist  agitation  was  only  a 
means  of  obtaining  surer  and  better  conditions  of  material 
existence,  that  is  to  say  of  obtaining  a  share  of  the  econo- 
mic prosperity,  resulting  from  the  formidable  and  methodic 
industrial  and  commercial  organization.  It  is  far  from 
being  evident  that  this  material  comfort,  for  which  the 
Socialists  fought  by  strike  and  ballot — as  far  as  the 
Constitution  permitted  these  to  have  any  influence — 
embodied  for  them  a  higher  aim  than  itself  or  was  con- 
sidered by  them  as  a  step  towards  a  higher  and  richer 
jewel  of  individuality  ...  a  transition,  as  it  were, 


182         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

towards  a  worthier  moral  life.  They  formed  powerful 
trade-unions  through  a  natural  leaning  towards  organized 
association.  But  with  them  this  was  barely  a  mani- 
festation of  the  spirit  of  discipline,  an  instinctive  incli- 
nation towards  aggregation,  to  escape,  in  a  manner,  the 
horror  of  emptiness  which  the  isolated  individual  feels 
whenever  he  is  incapable  of  finding  a  refuge  in  his  in- 
dividuality. These  trade-unions  obeyed  their  leaders 
and  lent  each  other  mutual  aid  in  the  struggle  for  higher 
wages.  But  they  reflected  no  original  idea,  no  general 
view,  no  generous  aspiration.  Nor  did  they  ever  seek  to 
check  Germany  in  her  course  along  the  highway  of  im- 
perialism: the  vote  of  the  armament  budget  was  only  an 
opportunity  to  win  some  economic  or  fiscal  advantage. 
.  .  .  Their  consciences  were  levelled  under  the  iron  rule 
which  bows  the  German  forehead. 

The  Government  did  not  fail  to  take  advantage  of 
this  tendency.  The  century  was  hastening  all  countries 
towards  social  legislation.  Instead  of  allowing  the  people 
to  conquer  its  new  privileges,  Bismarck  anticipated  its 
claims.  As  early  as  1878  he  inaugurated  the  great  social 
policy  which  provided  workingmen  with  legal  protection,  the 
right  to  leisure,  easier  conditions  of  work,  insurance  against 
old-age,  sickness,  and  unemployment  ...  all  advantages 
which  were  to  be  won  later  and  more  slowly  in  other 
countries.  "We  want  to  create  as  much  content  as 
possible,"  the  Chancellor  was  in  the  habit  of  saying. 
In  this  way  the  working  class  was  placed  under  the  State's 
tutelage.  The  new  situation,  no  doubt,  was  not  estab- 
lished without  contest:  the  workingmen  wanted  more 
than  was  offered  or  else  revolted  against  the  restrictive 
laws  by  means  of  which  the  Government  took  its  pre- 
cautions. But,  on  the  whole,  the  opposition  of  the  workers, 
as  evidenced  by  the  voice  of  their  representatives  in  the 
Reichstag,  was  not  irreducible.  "My  Socialists,"  re- 


Individualism  and  " State-ism"          183 

marked  William  II,  "are  not  so  bad."  The  Reformist 
party  of  Bernstein,  which  disapproved  revolutionary 
means,  has  continued  to  make  progress.  The  German 
Socialist,  originally  a  "State-ist, "  has  accepted  fhemain- 
mise  which  the  State  sought  to  operate  against  him  and 
succeeded  in  accomplishing. 

Nor  did  the  independence  of  the  middle-class,  of  those 
who  decked  themselves  with  the  title  of  Liberals,  appear 
to  any  better  advantage.  Citizens  of  all  classes  and  all 
parties  accept  the  scarcely  attenuated  autocracy  of  the 
Government  and  the  constant  meddling  of  the  adminis- 
tration in  the  daily  acts  of  life.  Along  with  the  clogging 
of  political  liberty  in  Germany,  the  acts  of  individual 
conduct  to  which  English  and  French  attach  so  much 
importance,  are  continually  shackled.  How  does  it 
stand  with  liberty  of  speech?  The  imprudent  person 
expressing  himself  anent  the  Emperor,  not  in  disrespectful 
but  simply  in  familiar  terms,  runs  the  risk  of  seeing  some 
member  of  the  social  group  rise  and  declare  that  he  will 
be  denounced  for  the  crime  of  high-treason.  Is  it  a  ques- 
tion of  the  liberty  of  the  press?  In  that  case,  if  some 
journalist,  for  instance,  has  published  a  soldier's  complaints 
against  the  brutality  of  an  officer,  he  is  summoned  to 
appear  in  court  and  called  upon  to  disclose  the  name  of  the 
complainer :  does  he  refuse  ?  He  is  straightway  thrown  into 
prison.  The  German  people  unflinchingly  accept  compul- 
sion where  free  peoples  recognize  offences  against  the  private 
person  and  against  the  conscience.  It  is  domesticated  and 
ordered  hierarchically.  Does  not  Professor  Ostwald  ap- 
praise us  of  the  subtle  distinctions  imposed  by  rank  even 
in  the  matter  of  piety :  he  gravely  tells  us  that  ' '  God  the 
Father"  is  reserved  for  the  exclusive  use  of  the  Emperor. 

We  were  apt  to  laugh  at  that  sort  of  thing  until  the 
hour  when  the  consequences  of  it  all  rose  up  before  us 
in  tragic  reality.  That  sort  of  thing  is  the  sign  that 


184         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

individualism,  the  conquest  of  the  moral  nobleness  of  the 
English  and  of  the  intellectual  intrepidity  of  the  French 
(which  the  Germans  had  understood  in  1789  and  again 
in  1848)  ...  no  longer  exists  beyond  the  Rhine.  It  is 
annihilated  under  the  crushing  weight  of  State  supremacy. 
Historians  and  political  writers  have  translated  into 
practical  rules  Hegel's  mystic  respect  for  the  idea  of  the 
State.  Treitschke  teaches  that  "The  State  is  the  highest 
point  to  which  the  human  society  may  attain;  above  the 
State,  there  exists  nothing  in  the  history  of  the  world." 
Nothing,  indeed,  not  even  eternal  reason  of  which  the  great 
writers  of  all  epochs  have  expressed  the  precepts ;  nothing, 
not  even  the  conscience!  The  raison  d'Etat  triumphs 
over  every  other  consideration.  What  is  in  the  interest 
of  the  State,  what  the  State  commands,  at  a  given  mo- 
ment, under  given  circumstances,  that  is  well  and  good 
...  it  is  right.  The  State  engenders  Right  by  means 
of  force.  The  individual  no  longer  has  recourse  to  that 
' '  inner  light ' '  which  nourishes  itself  with  the  best  of  human 
thought  and  which  tends  to  unite  men  into  a  society  of 
minds.  Let  a  general  appear  who  can  translate  the 
doctrine  of  the  State  and  the  doctrine  of  force  into  military 
terms,  and  we  have  the  aphorism  of  Bernhardi :  ' '  For  a 
nation  which  is  growing,  force  is  the  supreme  Right, 
and  the  point  of  knowing  what  is  just  is  decided  by  the 
arbitrage  of  war."  Our  revenge  is  this,  that  the  contempt 
of  individualism  has  vitiated  even  military  methods, 
in  which  German  "State-ism"  believed  itself  triumphant. 
Their  atrocious  manner  of  conducting  the  war  has  proved 
to  be  the  supreme  error  of  their  scientific  barbarism:  it 
has  not  vanquished  the  individual  valour  of  the  soldiers 
of  Right;  the  terror  which  they  believed  they  could 
inspire  exists  no  more,  submerged  under  an  irresistible 
wave  of  revolt  and  indignation. 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         185 

And  now  let  us  turn  to  England.  .  .  .  How  comforting 
is  the  voice  of  her  philosophers  and  moralists  after  the 
sinister  homilies  of  a  Treitschke,  of  a  Bernhardi,  of  a 
Maximilian  Harden!  How  cheering  a  sight  is  the  rise 
of  her  people,  with  all  the  dignity  of  a  man  proud  of  his 
personal  value,  of  his  independence,  of  his  particular 
thought,  yet  ready  to  respect  real  superiority  and  com- 
petency, ready  to  accept  the  discipline  which  gives  its 
cohesion  to  the  nation,  voluntarily  subject  to  those  time- 
honoured  rules  and  gradations  which  Burke  named  "the 
solemn  plausibilities"  of  the  social  body!  How  well  her 
contemporary  writers,  even  those  most  penetrated  with 
the  scientific  spirit,  even  the  partisans  of  what  is  fecund 
in  the  solidarist  doctrine,  jealously  defend  the  fortress  of 
the  individual  conscience,  set  in  the  heart  of  socialism 
as  a  lighthouse  and  defence! 

The  work  of  Stuart  Mill  on  Liberty  expresses,  no  doubt, 
too  great  a  distrust  of  governmental  intervention  in 
private  conduct,  intervention  which  a  juster  conception 
of  the  general  interest  causes  to  be  accepted  almost  uni- 
versally today.  Nevertheless,  one  must  go  back  to  a  few 
imperishable  pages  of  this  work,  if  one  wishes  to  find  the 
just  expression  of  the  essentials  of  individualism.  What- 
ever extension  of  State  functions  one  may  admit,  there  is 
a  sphere  which  should  remain  forever  inviolable  in  any 
community  in  which  the  principle  of  liberty  is  not  sys- 
tematically overthrown.  .  .  . 

In  the  first  place  [says  Mill],  this  sphere  comprises  the 
domain  of  consciousness:  Liberty  of  conscience,  liberty  of 
thought  and  sentiment,  and  liberty  of  opinion  on  all  subjects, 
practical  or  theoretical,  scientific,  moral  or  theological.  .  .  . 
In  the  second  place,  liberty  of  tastes  and  pursuits;  of  framing 
our  plan  of  life  to  suit  our  own  character;  of  acting  as  we 
please  so  long  as  we  do  no  harm  to  our  fellow-creatures,  even 


1 86         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

though  they  should  think  our  conduct  foolish,  perverse,  or 
wrong.  ...  In  the  third  place,  liberty  of  association,  which 
results  from  all  the  others,  and  which  should  be  limited  by  one 
restriction  only: — that  the  association  be  formed  by  mutual 
consent. 

The  reason  why  Mill  insists  upon  the  full  enjoyment 
of  the  diverse  forms  of  liberty,  is  because  liberty  is  not  one 
in  nature,  but  complex  and  variable.  At  such  and  such 
a  moment  of  the  evolution  of  thought,  it  is  made  up  of 
the  sum  of  the  original  notions  born  of  the  individual 
reaction  of  minds  on  the  multiple  forms  of  experience. 

Humanity  is  not  infallible;  our  thoughts  are  for  the  most 
part  but  half-truths;  the  unity  of  opinion,  unless  it  is  the  result 
of  the  free  comparison  of  opposed  opinions,  is  not  desirable. 
Diversity,  very  far  from  being  an  evil,  is  a  good  ...  at  least 
as  long  as  humanity  is  not  more  capable  than  at  present  of 
considering  the  different  aspects  of  things. 

It  is,  then,  the  scientific  idea  of  the  relativity  of  judg- 
ment which  inspires  Mill  with  his  passion  for  liberty; 
he  is  resolved  never  to  fall  asleep  on  the  soft  pillow  of 
doubt,  •  but  to  struggle  unceasingly,  with  the  help  of  all, 
in  free  and  fruitful  competition,  in  order  to  wrest  from  the 
universe  some  new  tokens  of  its  secret. 

The  other  idea  of  which  he  constructs  the  basis  of  his 
belief,  is  the  idea  of  gradual  and  continual  development. 
Liberty,  as  he  understands  it,  is  attached  to  the  principle 
of  evolution,  which  has  become  in  our  century  the  great 
mainspring  of  progress.  A  nation  is  not  great  by  reason 
of  the  momentary  force  which  it  draws  from  a  factitious 
uniformity:  the  temporary  advantage  thus  obtained  by 
constraint  is  only  a  shadow,  for  it  is  based  upon  immobility. 
Now  immobility  means  moral  death.  .  .  .  True  national 
greatness  can  only  repose  upon  the  moral  and  intellectual 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         187 

growth  of  individuals.  What  a  monster  a  collectivity 
would  be,  if  it  were  reduced  to  the  state  of  a  mechanism. 
Inclinations  and  desires  disciplined  by  the  reason  are 
really  what  constitute  the  person.  .  .  .  "He  who  feels 
himself  moved  by  inclinations  and  desires  distinctly  his 
own — the  expressions  of  his  temperament,  developed  and 
modified  by  culture — possesses  truly  a  character.  He 
whose  inclinations  and  desires  are  not  his  own,  has  no 
more  character  than  a  steam-engine."  The  social  or- 
ganization ought,  then,  to  have  in  view  the  development, 
by  a  happy  combination  of  governmental  intervention 
and  liberty,  of  the  greatest  number  of  individualities. 
"The  value  of  a  State,  finally,  is  nothing  else  but  the 
value  of  the  individuals  of  which  it  is  composed." 

Stuart  Mill  owed  much  to  Carlyle  who  taught  him  the 
narrowness  and  insufficiency  of  uncompromising  rational- 
ism, and  pointed  him  towards  sympathy,  sentiment,  social 
solidarity,  and  the  respect  of  the  intuitions  of  the  heart 
and  conscience.  But  the  friendship  which  united  these 
two  men  for  a  time,  could  not  last,  because  each  repre- 
sented one  of  the  extremes  of  contemporary  thought. 
Carlyle,  fearing  the  excesses  of  democracy,  insisted  too 
strongly  on  the  principle  of  authority;  Mill,  fearing  the 
excesses  of  governmental  intervention,  exaggerated  the 
uncompromising  element  of  the  principle  of  liberty. 
English  liberalism  is  seeking  its  way  today  in  an  applica- 
tion prudently  swung  from  one  principle  to  the  other, 
that  is  to  say,  in  a  compromise.  It  is  not  obliged,  how- 
ever, to  deny  either  one  of  its  two  spiritual  ancestors, 
for  both  have  strengthened,  though  differently,  English 
individualism.  Mill  demanded  the  independence  of 
thought,  since,  being  scientifically  minded  and  impressed 
with  the  sense  of  the  relative  and  the  sense  of  change,  he 
looked  for  progress  from  the  shock  of  ideas  and  from  the 
co-operation  of  all  in  the  work  of  truth.  Carlyle  pointed 


i88         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

out  the  force  of  feelings  and  beliefs,  that  is  to  say,  of  firm 
motives,  which,  at  a  given  moment,  captivate  the  will, 
determine  the  related  action,  and  become  a  tie  between 
consciences.  "Firm  motives"  and  not  "fixed  motives," 
one  should  observe:  for  he,  too,  admitted  evolution  and 
progress.  He  saw  in  the  lives  of  great  men,  or  heroes 
as  he  calls  them,  the  creatures  of  new  and  prolific  ideas, 
which,  from  century  to  century,  cause  humanity  to  ad- 
vance a  few  steps.  The  common  mortal  is  scarcely 
capable  of  aught  but  imitation,  which  in  turn  is  based  on 
respect.  These  were  profound  observations  which  were 
destined  to  rally  the  adherence  of  Mill.  They  express  well 
enough  the  mentality  of  the  English  nation,  which  is 
disciplined  and  respectful  without  ceasing  to  be  indi- 
vidualist. Where  the  two  thinkers  differed  was  on  the 
question  of  degree  and  means.  Mill  wished  to  see  the 
development  of  strong  individualities  capable  of  forming 
the  framework  of  the  social  body,  not  merely  of  a  handful 
of  heroes,  but  of  a  considerable  elite  of  superior  men, 
sprung  from  the  masses,  as  the  plant  springs  from  the  soil, 
sustained  and  nourished  with  the  sap  of  liberty.  Mill 
had  faith  in  democracy,  itself  qualified  to  proceed  with  the 
work  of  selection,  whence  it  draws  its  value,  and  alone 
rich  enough  in  human  virtualities  to  supply  and  accelerate 
progress.  It  was  his  conception  which  prevailed,  modi- 
fied, however,  and  vivified  by  the  doctrine  of  the  social 
organization. 

According  to  the  conception  which  is  the  latest  form 
assumed  by  English  individualism,  society  is  not  composed 
of  isolated  individuals,  whose  dispersion  is  corrected  only 
by  sympathy  and  the  consented  acceptance  of  discipline; 
it  is  a  living  body,  the  parts  of  which — just  as  the  organs 
of  a  being  of  flesh  and  blood — are  in  such  intimate  relation- 
ship that  the  action  of  one  influences  the  action  of  all  the 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         189 

others  and  that  the  suffering  of  any  one  involves  the  decline 
of  the  whole  body.  There  is  then  an  analogy  between 
the  modes  of  social  life  and  the  modes  of  animal  life,  but 
with  this  difference,  that  the  social  organism  is  the  work 
of  the  intelligence  and  of  the  will,  amendable  and  modifi- 
able at  each  moment  of  its  duration,  and  more  than  that, 
under  the  strict  necessity  of  being  amended  and  modified 
in  order  to  endure.  The  social  organism  is  a  creation  of 
man  which  can  subsist  only  through  a  continuous  act  of 
creation.  In  France  and  in  England,  countries  of  demo- 
cracy and  liberty,  the  direction  which  the  collective  will 
communicates  to  the  complex  working  of  the  organism 
is  the  development  of  the  individual.  The  collective 
conscience  is  made  up  of  the  sum,  or  rather  of  the 
interpenetration  and  of  the  interaction  of  the  individual 
consciences.  The  whole  is  not  an  excrescence ;  a  parasite 
vegetation  which  absorbs  the  sap  of  the  individual  cells, 
causes  them  to  droop  and  surrender  their  self -existence,  as 
it  happens  in  the  German  conception  of  the  State.  The 
whole  exists  only  as  instrumental  to  the  growth  of  the 
parts  ...  a  comprehensive  intelligence  which  surveys 
the  needs  of  the  ensemble,  but  thinks  only  through  the 
thought  of  each  ...  a  general  will,  the  determinations 
of  which  proceed  from  the  periphery  towards  the  centre, 
instead  of  shooting  out  from  the  centre  and  finally  smother- 
ing the  peripheric  elements.  The  parliamentary  regime  is 
the  only  form  of  government  which  suits  social  individual- 
ism, for  it  is  only  through  the  parliamentary  regime  that 
individual  judgments  harmonize  into  a  collective  judgment, 
always  ready  to  undergo  modifications  according  to  the 
fluctuations  of  events  and  the  psychological  reactions 
which  accompany  them.  The  associations  play  the  part 
of  intermediaries  between  the  individual  and  the  col- 
lectivity. Thus  the  wills,  being  both  free  and  conjugated, 
accept  the  more  active  and  frequent  intervention  of  the 


190         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

State,  because  there  is  no  longer  any  conflict  between 
the  Government  and  the  free  citizen,  and  because,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  liberty  of  all  receives  its  full  development 
through  the  moderate  and  opportune  intervention  of  the 
Government. 

The  full  fruit  of  social  progress  [writes  Professor  Hobhouse], 
can  be  gathered  only  by  a  society,  in  which  the  generality  of 
men  and  women  are  not  passive  recipients  but  active  producers 
and  contributors.  To  make  the  rights  and  responsibilities  of 
the  citizens  real  and  living,  and  to  extend  them  as  widety  as  the 
actual  conditions  of  society  will  permit,  such  is  the  end  of  the 
organic  conception  of  the  social  body;  such  is  the  justification 
of  the  principle  of  democracy.  It  is  also  the  justification  of 
the  principle  of  nationalities.  For  inasmuch  as  the  true  social 
harmony  rests  on  feeling  and  makes  use  of  all  the  natural 
ties  of  kinship,  of  neighbourliness,  of  congruity  of  character 
and  belief,  and  of  language  and  customs,  the  best,  healthiest, 
and  most  vigorous  political  unit  is  the  one  towards  which 
men  are  drawn  most  strongly  by  their  feelings.  All  breach  of 
such  unity,  whether  by  forcible  disruption  or  by  compulsory 
inclusion  in  a  larger  society  of  alien  sentiments,  habits,  and 
laws,  tends  to  mutilate  or  strangle  the  spontaneous  develop- 
ment of  social  life.  National  liberty  and  social  liberty  grow 
on  the  same  root;  their  historical  connection  reposes  on  no 
accident  but  upon  ultimate  identity  of  idea. 

These  words  written  in  1910  are  the  expression  of  the 
best  of  English  thought;  the  sentiment  which  inspires 
them  is  the  sentiment  which  is  sustaining  the  energy  of  the 
English  people  and  its  soldiers.  It  is  also  the  sentiment 
which  suggests  to  the  leaders  of  English  thought  the 
wise  and  just  resolution  (entirely  shared  by  the  French) 
that  the  war,  which  ought  to  put  an  end  to  Prussian 
militarism  without  pity,  ought  not  to  aim  at  the  dis- 
memberment of  the  German  nation.  Under  this  condi- 
tion (provided  the  Germans  are  amenable  to  humaner 


Individualism  and  "State-ism"         191 

feelings)  the  Allies,  who  found  their  cause  on  right,  will 
be  able  to  establish  the  future  of  Europe  on  the  principles 
of  equity. 

The  doctrine  of  social  individualism  is  a  compromise 
between  two  forces  which  were  long  believed  to  be  an- 
tagonistic, and  which  a  better  understanding  of  the 
conditions  of  collective  life,  a  more  legitimate  direction 
of  the  intelligence  and  the  will,  has  reconciled.  Let  us 
not  be  surprised  however  that,  with  the  sociologists  of 
today,  personal  preferences  incline  sometimes  towards 
individualism  and  sometimes  towards  socialism.  What  is 
remarkable  is  that  even  the  Socialists  in  England  propose, 
as  a  goal  for  collective  organization,  not  the  enthroning 
of  a  Despot-State,  a  Leviathan-State,  bent  on  devouring 
individualities,  but  the  establishment  of  a  more  intelligent 
society,  which,  by  "comprehensive  co-operation,"  de- 
finitely liberates  the  individual.  Mr.  H.  G.  Wells,  better 
known  in  France  as  the  author  of  fantastic  novels  than 
as  the  sociological  novelist  and  political  thinker  that  he 
really  is,  represents  this  form — so  fruitful,  even  if  it 
wanders  somewhat  towards  Utopia — of  constructing  and 
liberating  socialism.  Mr.  Wells,  who  commenced  life  as  a 
professor  of  science,  is,  of  all  English  socialists,  the  most 
sympathetic  towards  German  scientific  thought.  He  is 
struck  with  the  disorder  which  reigns  in  the  world.  Com- 
petency is  scarce,  vanity  rules  as  queen,  and  the  in- 
sufficiency of  some  and  the  over-sufficiency  of  others  are 
conducting  us  into  a  chaos  of  bungling  activity.  The  most 
capable  rarely  wish  to  employ  their  talents  for  the  com- 
mon good ;  as  for  the  waste  caused  by  the  incapable  and 
perverted — it  is  incalculable.  From  his  point  of  view — 
(Wells  is  a  pessimist  through  a  natural  tendency,  ex- 
aggerated by  a  desire  for  literary  effect) — our  society, 
despite  half-hearted  desires  for  organization,  still  presents 
the  spectacle  of  "...  the  Individualism  of  a  crowd  of 


1 92         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

separated,  undisciplined  little  people  all  obstinately  and 
ignorantly  doing  things  jarringly,  each  one  in  his  own 
way.  .  .  .  Each  snarling  from  his  own  little  bit  of  pro- 
perty, like  a  dog  tied  to  a  cart's  tail.  ..."  The  remedy 
which  he  proposes  is  the  reconstruction  of  the  whole 
system  according  to  the  axioms  of  science.  The  new 
science  of  "Eugenics"  which  endeavours  to  better  the 
conditions  of  birth,  is  to  give  us  a  healthy  and  robust 
humanity.  A  rational  education  is  to  construct,  on  a 
foundation  of  physical  health,  the  mental  faculties  which 
are  to  make  all  citizens  useful  to  themselves  and  others. 
No  sentimentality:  the  socially  useless  is  to  be  eliminated, 
or  definitely  prevented  from  reproducing.  As  to  pro- 
ductive activity,  it  is  to  be  regulated  in  all  branches  by 
expert  functionaries  to  be  rigorously  chosen  for  their 
science  and  competency.  The  State  is  to  intervene  where- 
ever  its  authority  is  necessary  to  co-ordinate  private  action, 
even  in  questions  of  marriage  and  property.  In  short,  the 
whole  matter  of  government  and  administration  is  to  be 
revised  by  utilizing  as  a  starting-point  the  new  principle 
of  "efficiency." 

What  precedes  would  seem  to  classify  Wells  neces- 
sarily among  the  "State-ists."  Yet  all  this  systematiza- 
tion  of  the  social  organization  betrays,  after  analysis,  a 
fundamental  principle  of  supple  life,  of  spontaneous  vig- 
our, and  of  autonomous  individualism.  Of  course  some 
principle  is  necessary,  we  must  have  organization;  but 
this  principle  and  this  organization  ought  to  spring  from 
the  social  body  itself  and  vary  according  to  the  phases  of 
its  evolution.  No  authority  of  a  haughty  and  despotic 
nature  ought  to  prevail ;  not  even  a  scientific  idea  ought  to 
compress  the  free  play  of  moral  forces.  Mr.  Wells  writes 
a  Utopia,  but  he  warns  us  that  he  poses  only  general 
principles  destined  to  stimulate  thought  and  that  the 
particular  solutions  which  he  is  led  to  suggest  ought  not 


Individualism  and  " State-ism"         193 

to  be  considered  as  final.  He  furnishes  the  example  of  a 
mind  at  work;  he  hopes  to  lead  forward  towards  social 
speculation  all  creative  intelligence  the  collaboration  of 
which  is  necessary  for  the  discovery  of  truth,  that  is  to 
say,  for  the  setting  of  practical  applications  which  may 
be  expected  to  prevail  for  a  time.  The  higher  aim  of  this 
collective  effort  is  to  liberate  individuality  wherever  it 
exists  potentially.  What  Carlyle  was  in  the  habit  of 
calling  a  "hero"  and  Mill  a  "strong  character,"  Wells 
calls  a  "unique  man";  his  whole  sociology  tends  towards 
producing  the  "unique."  A  progression  in  this  sense 
is  noticeable  in  the  course  of  his  literary  production: 
one  of  his  more  recent  sociological  novels,  The  New  Machi- 
avelli,  deviates  from  a  certain  rigidity  of  doctrine  which 
was  not  absent  from  his  first  works.  The  leading  char- 
acter indicates  in  the  following  terms  his  ever-growing 
attachment  to  the  predominance  of  the  "unique": 

I  began  in  my  teens  by  wanting  to  plan  and  build  cities  and 
harbours  for  mankind;  I  ended  in  the  middle  thirties  by 
desiring  only  to  serve  and  increase  a  general  process  of  thought. 
.  .  .  The  real  work  before  mankind  now,  I  realized  once  and 
for  all,  is  the  enlargement  of  human  expression,  the  release 
and  intensification  of  human  thought,  the  vivider  utilization 
of  experience,  and  the  invigoration  of  research.  .  .  . 

This  final  outcome  of  English  Socialism  is  characteristic : 
it  is  the  triumph  of  individualism  by  means  of  organization. 

The  programme  of  the  Radical  Socialists,  who  have  been 
in  power  for  ten  years,  is  an  application  of  liberal  princi- 
ples to  social  individualism.  It  is  recapitulated  in  two 
important  articles :  first,  economic  liberation  of  the  prole- 
tariat through  high  progressive  taxation  on  the  unearned 
incomes  of  the  rich,  purchase  of  the  large  landed  estates 
by  the  collectivity,  insurance  against  accident,  invalidity, 

13 


194         Individualism  and  "State-ism" 

and  weakness  through  old  age  or  sickness ;  second,  political 
liberation  by  means  of  rights  granted  to  municipalities, 
universal  suffrage,  soon  to  be  followed  by  woman's  suf- 
frage, and  the  suppression  of  the  veto  of  the  House  of 
Lords. 

I  shall  attempt  to  show  in  a  following  chapter  in  what 
way  English  customs,  the  methods  of  education,  and  the 
spirit  which  sways  the  people  bring  to  light  everywhere, 
as  in  the  case  of  institutions  and  doctrines,  the  triumph  of 
individualism. 

There  is,  then,  essential  incompatibility  between  Eng- 
lish thought  and  German  thought.  Nevertheless,  these 
same  Radicals  who  hold  so  tenaciously  to  the  indi- 
vidualist spirit  in  the  initial  process  of  social  trans- 
formation cultivated  German  friendship  as  long  as  it  was 
possible,  and  to  such  lengths,  indeed,  that  the  confidence 
they  obstinately  placed  in  the  people  across  the  Rhine 
came  near  to  leaving  England  in  the  lurch,  at  the  moment 
of  aggression.  There  were  two  reasons  for  this  attitude. 
The  first  was  that  love  of  peace,  opposition  to  all  military 
organization,  and  desire  to  reserve  all  the  resources  of  the 
country  for  social  needs  led  them  to  hope  that  their 
exemplary  proceeding  would  merit  reciprocal  action  and 
that  the  German  menace  would  soon  calm  down.  The 
second  was  that  the  hypocritical  protestations  of  the 
Emperor  and  of  the  successive  Chancellors  so  expert  in 
juggling  with  words  of  peace  and  the  good-fellow  attitude 
of  the  Sozialdemokratie  simply  imposed  upon  them. 

Today  the  scales  have  fallen  from  their  eyes.  The 
latent  antagonism  between  English  individualism  and 
German  State-ism  has  broken  out,  and  so  much  the  more 
violently,  after  the  rending  of  the  veil,  because  English 
goodwill  had  previously  redoubled  its  efforts  to  dis- 
simulate the  state  of  affairs.  It  was  at  this  juncture  that 
individualism  revealed  itself  in  its  most  admirable  form: 


Individualism  and  ''State-ism"         195 

two  million  voluntary  enrolments  were  signed — without 
the  intervention  of  the  law  and  solely  through  a  sentiment 
of  duty  and  a  spirit  of  sacrifice — by  the  sons  of  England 
ready  to  do  battle  for  the  English  ideal.  The  Germans 
were  overwhelmed  by  the  significance  of  the  deed. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
Imperialism  and  Empire 

FIRST  PART:  IMPERIALISM  OF  EXPANSION 

BESIDES  the  foundation  of  liberty  and  the  devel- 
opment of  individualism,  colonial  expansion  is 
England's  particular  achievement.  Just  as,  since 
the  Middle  Ages,  the  Constitution  forms  the  pivot  of 
her  internal  policy,  so  from  the  Renaissance  down,  the 
Empire  forms  the  central  point  of  her  external  policy. 
Nowadays,  "imperialism"  is  understood  to  mean  the 
movement  which  induces  vigorous  nations  to  extend 
their  activity  beyond  their  national  frontiers.  Spain 
gave  an  example  of  it  in  the  New  World,  but  she  was 
unable  to  maintain  the  necessary  effort.  France,  despite 
certain  painful  vicissitudes,  succeeded  in  the  attempt. 
For  England,  colonial  expansion  has  been  a  triumph: 
her  flag  floats  over  territories  which  cover  a  quarter  of 
the  habitable  globe. 

Now  English  imperialism  has  an  exclusively  colonial 
character;  it  extends  beyond  Europe  to  minor  peoples 
little  capable  of  governing  themselves  and  to  territories 
either  unoccupied  or  maladroitly  exploited  by  the  occu- 
pants. It  is  important  to  distinguish  this  form  of  expan- 
sion from  that  which  Pan-Germanism  puts  into  effect  or 
would  like  to  put  into  effect.  German  imperialism  fixes  its 
choice  in  Europe  upon  historical  and  ancient  possessions, 

196 


Imperialism  and  Empire  197 

occupied  as  rightful  properties  by  worthy  and  capable 
owners,  sanctified  by  the  heroism  of  a  lineage  of  great 
ancestors  and  by  centuries  of  civilization.  German 
imperialism,  guilty  of  aggression  and  assault,  in  negation  of 
all  right,  has  rendered  itself  odious  by  cruelty  in  war  and 
tyranny  in  peace.  English  imperialism,  whatever  wrongs 
it  may  have  inflicted  at  certain  moments,  has  never  ceased 
to  be  actuated  by  a  desire  for  more  justice,  more  liberty, 
and  more  humanity.  The  English,  not  only  because  of 
their  acquired  rights,  but  also  because  of  their  respect  for 
abstract  Right,  are  justified  in  defending  their  Empire 
against  the  attempt  at  universal  domination  by  which  the 
Germans,  according  to  their  own  testimony,  wished  to 
complete  their  attempt  at  hegemony  in  Europe. 

What  English  Imperialism  is,  in  its  more  recent  phases, 
in  what  respects  it  authorizes  the  English  people  to  fight 
today  with  a  clear  conscience  for  civilization  and  progress : 
we  intend  to  seek  to  determine  in  this  chapter. 

It  was  in  the  second  half  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
during  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  that  the  desire  to 
force  the  barrier  set  by  the  ocean  all  around  the  British 
Isles  appeared  for  the  first  time  among  men  of  thought  and 
men  of  action  in  England.  The  English  were  neither 
the  first  explorers  nor  the  first  colonizers,  but  when  they 
had  once  entered  upon  the  great  movement  which  had 
already  led  the  Spaniards  to  the  New  World,  they  dis- 
played, with  as  much  boldness  as  their  rivals,  the  qualities 
of  self-command,  of  consistency,  and  discipline  which  were 
to  give  them  the  advantage  over  all  others. 

They  were  a  race  of  sailors,  inured  to  the  perils  of  the 
Ocean.  Their  pulses  beat  with  the  blood  of  the  Vikings 
.  .  .  those  hardy  rovers  who,  urged  by  their  valour  and 
lured  by  the  spell  of  the  unknown,  were  wont  to  steer 
their  frail  crafts  straight  into  the  open  sea.  This  spirit 


198  Imperialism  and  Empire 

of  the  Vikings  showed  itself,  in  the  sixteenth  century,  in 
men  of  the  Willoughby,  Drake,  Frobisher,  and  Walter 
Raleigh  type.  The  love  of  a  hard  fight  against  the  elements 
and  the  intoxication  of  risk  went  hand  in  hand  with  the 
hope  of  big  booty — spices  and  gold-dust  ravished  from  the 
lands  of  sunshine,  or  seized  aboard  Spanish  galleons. 
The  more  unprincipled  among  them  managed  to  conciliate 
a  passion  for  gain  with  their  patriotic  duties.  Such  were 
certain  pious  buccaneers  who  plundered  King  Philip's 
subjects,  the  vanquished  of  the  Armada,  with  the  idea 
that  they  were  fulfilling  a  "heavenly  mission."  The  more 
enlightened  were  already  brooding  over  a  vast  dream  of 
national  aggrandizement.  They  were  cultured  men  brought 
up  in  the  school  of  the  Renaissance;  they  had  not  forgotten 
the  history  of  Greece  and  Rome.  Why  should  not  England 
become  in  the  New  World  the  emulator  of  those  who  had 
colonized  and  civilized  the  Old? 

History  was  to  give  body  to  these  dreams.  Carried 
forward  by  her  vitality,  by  her  passion  for  the  things  of  the 
sea,  by  the  need  of  escaping  the  limits  of  her  island,  by  her 
talent  for  trade,  England,  little  by  little  in  the  course 
of  fortuitous  events  and  struggles  with  rival  nations, 
extended  her  possessions.  Sometimes  the  independent 
spirit  of  a  religious  sect,  and  at  others  the  enterprising 
spirit  of  a  trading  company,  won  her  a  colony.  Her 
most  precious  conquests  were  made  at  the  expense  of 
France.  In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries 
she  availed  herself  of  every  armed  conflict  with  her  French 
neighbours  to  extend  her  boundaries  or  settle  in  some  part 
of  the  world  whither  they  had  preceded  her :  thus  Canada 
and  India  fell  into  her  hands.  At  Gibraltar,  at  Malta, 
at  Aden,  in  Mauritius,  in  the  Malay  Archipelago  she 
established  defence  and  relay  stations  along  the  great 
oceanic  highways.  The  continuity  of  her  plans,  her 
tenacity  in  holding  firm  wherever  she  settled,  the  ad- 


Imperialism  and  Empire  199 

vantage  of  her  insular  position  placing  her  beyond  con- 
tinental complications  and  encouraging  her  to  concentrate 
her  efforts  on  the  extension  of  her  colonies,  and  finally 
her  supremacy  of  the  sea,  assured  her  success  precisely 
where  others  failed.  These  two  centuries  thus  repre- 
sent the  great  period  of  her  colonial  construction  and 
consolidation. 

In  1775,  the  revolt  of  the  Colonies  of  America  marked 
the  beginning  of  a  transformation  in  her  administrative 
methods:  prompt  to  take  advantage  of  the  lessons  of 
experience,  she  came  to  understand  that  she  was  ill- 
directed  in  treating  her  own  people  settled  in  distant  lands 
as  subjects  and  not  as  citizens.  Hence  began  an  era  of 
colonial  emancipation  destined,  in  freeing  the  English 
beyond  the  sea,  to  attach  them  to  the  mother  country  by 
ties  of  gratitude  and  affection.  Still  later,  the  movement 
of  nationalities,  which  caused  an  outburst  of  powerful 
group-sentiment  all  over  Europe,  found  in  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  people  dispersed  across  the  continents  a  new  and 
immense  field  in  which  to  exercise  itself.  In  the'  second 
half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  two  currents  of  spiritual 
forces  were  set  in  motion:  one  from  the  colonies  towards 
the  metropolis  and  the  other  from  the  metropolis  towards 
the  colonies.  And  so  this  great  body  became  animated 
with  a  soul.  England  grew  conscious  of  the  importance 
of  the  work  accomplished,  of  the  task  yet  to  be  achieved, 
of  the  possibilities  of  material  and  immaterial  power 
contained  in  the  Empire,  ready  to  be  developed.  Once 
the  Empire  was  organized,  bound  into  a  sheaf  and  rendered 
more  and  more  accessible  to  higher  destinies,  English- 
men began  to  speak  of  an  "imperial  policy"  and  of  an 
"imperial  destiny."  The  horizon  lifted  and  broadened; 
new  points  of  direction  were  discovered  in  the  distance. 
The  growth  of  the  Empire  was  no  longer  to  be  left  to  the 
drift  of  happy  circumstances;  a  guiding  principle  was  to 


200  Imperialism  and  Empire 

preside  over  its  doings  and  a  deep-rooted  sentiment  was  to 
lend  it  spiritual  force.  Thus  the  imperialistic  spirit  took 
definite  shape  and  assumed  a  distinctly  English  value — 
in  other  words  it  became  the  desire  to  found,  through 
expansion  and  union,  the  Empire  of  Greater  Britain. 

New  conditions  of  fact  and  new  currents  of  ideas  com- 
bined in  the  last  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  to  give 
direction  to  the  imperialistic  movement.  Not  since  Water- 
loo had  England  been  menaced  in  Europe.  She  was 
aware  of  her  strength:  her  supremacy  of  the  sea  and  her 
prestige  permitted  her  to  make  her  influence  felt  even 
in  questions  which  did  not  immediately  concern  her. 
She  challenged  no  one;  she  remained  attached  to  her 
policy  of  the  balance  of  power;  but  she  was  wont  to  inter- 
vene fearlessly,  both  to  protect  her  interests  and  to  defend 
liberty  imperilled  or  the  principle  of  nationality  violated. 
The  activity  of  Palmerston  and  then  that  of  Disraeli 
are  the  outward  signs  of  this  national  health  and  vigour. 

After  1870,  the  necessity  of  a  world-policy  forced  itself 
on  her  attention.  France  was  increasing  her  colonial 
domain.  Russia  was  growing  in  Asia.  Germany,  who 
had  long  limited  her  ambitions  to  the  Continent,  was 
seeking,  in  her  turn,  to  settle  in  the  parts  of  the  world 
which  had  remained  unoccupied.  England  could  not  hold 
her  position  as  mistress  of  the  seas  unless  she  secured 
new  points  of  support  along  the  routes  of  the  globe  and 
new  lines  of  communication  between  the  scattered  ele- 
ments of  her  Empire.  Moreover,  the  development  of  her 
population  and  the  considerable  extension  of  her  com- 
merce and  industry  gave  rise  to  new  problems.  From  a 
country  of  twelve  million  inhabitants  in  the  days  of  the 
Napoleonic  wars,  she  had  become  a  country  of  forty 
million  souls.  Each  year  emigration  poured  into  other 
lands  the  overflow  of  her  subjects:  was  it  not  fitting  to 


Imperialism  and  Empire  201 

give  a  direction  to  this  wave  of  vital  energies,  which  ought 
to  remain  English,  and  to  hold  the  sons  of  England  in 
close  relation  and  sympathy  with  the  mother  country? 
Finally,  industry  had  need  of  raw  material,  commerce 
had  need  of  markets:  new  colonies  ought  to  be  the  reply 
to  this  progression  of  economic  development. 

New  currents  of  ideas  and  sentiments  threw  these 
facts  into  clear  relief,  co-ordinating  them  and  drawing 
therefrom  the  moral  and  practical  consequences.  The 
meaning  of  race  solidarity  was  growing  within  the  Empire, 
precisely  at  the  time  when  the  sentiment  of  social  soli- 
darity was  developing  within  the  nation.  The  same 
thinker,  Thomas  Carlyle,  expressed  them  both  under  the 
sway  of  the  same  historical  causes  and  of  the  same  emo- 
tional and  idealistic  influences.  Now  if  it  is  true  that  a 
nation  can  attain  its  full  growth  and  develop  both  in 
power  and  in  harmony  only  by  means  of  the  mutual  aid, 
respect,  and  goodwill  of  the  component  individuals  and 
classes,  is  it  not  also  evident  that  a  prolific,  energetic,  and 
enterprising  race  like  the  Anglo-Saxons  will  attain  its 
full  power  of  expansion  and  creation,  its  full  capacity  of 
civilizing  action,  its  maximum  greatness,  only  by  means 
of  the  union  and  co-operation  of  the  group-elements  which 
it  has  sown  across  the  world?  Initiative,  daring,  the 
spirit  of  adventure,  legitimate  desire  for  gain,  vigorous 
self-confidence,  self-reliance,  in  short  all  of  the  individualist 
qualities  which  guarantee  the  Anglo-Saxon  his  power  of 
success  will  not  be  diminished  but  rather  intensified 
by  the  voluntary  submission  of  the  egoism  of  each  group 
to  the  common  interest.  Each  filial  society  in  its  corner 
of  the  universe  will  share  in  the  English  power,  and,  over 
and  above  the  advantages  measurable  in  coin,  will  main- 
tain within  itself  the  living  flame  of  the  spirit,  which  passes 
measure: — the  English  conception  of  things,  an  English 
code  of  moral  duties,  a  communion  of  sentiment,  volitions, 


2O2  Imperialism  and  Empire 

and  hopes  with  the  leaders  of  thought,  the  creators  of 
art,  and  the  founders  of  the  ideal  of  the  English  race. 
And  so  a  current  of  moral  force,  or  as  Carlyle  liked  to 
say,  a  breath  of  "heroism, "  will  carry  the  enthusiasm  for 
the  glories  of  the  past  and  the  fond  hopes  of  the  future 
from  the  mother  country  to  the  colonies  and  back  from 
the  colonies  to  the  mother  country.  And  this  spiritual 
cement  will  create  an  indissoluble  union  .  .  .  the  union 
of  hearts  and  minds. 

It  cannot  be  dissimulated  that  this  exaltation  of  the 
racial  idea  contained  a  leaven  of  vast  ambitions  which  are 
not  unlike  that  tumultuous  ebullition  of  the  national  spirit 
of  which  Germany  is  furnishing  the  spectacle  today. 
Nevertheless,  despite  certain  alarming  germs  and  certain 
violent  impulses  towards  expansion,  English  imperialism 
has  discovered,  in  the  noble  traditions  of  the  nation, 
in  the  deep-seated  poise  of  the  national  temperament,  and 
more  recently  in  the  sentiment  of  human  solidarity,  a 
counter-weight  which  has  arrested  her  on  the  slope  of 
injustice  and  led  her  back,  after  temporary  backslidings, 
into  the  straight  road  of  equity.  Compared  with  English 
imperialism,  German  imperialism  is  the  perversion  of  a 
great  national  force,  such  as  one  could  expect  from  a 
people  which,  for  a  century,  has  sought  success  only 
through  the  agency  of  exclusive  egoism  and  unchained 
violence.  English  imperialism  has  grown  temperate, 
thanks  to  an  ethical  instinct  which  keeps  alive,  in  con- 
temporary England,  the  feeling  of  self-respect  and  the 
sentiment  of  the  solidarity  of  nations  in  the  work  of  pro- 
gress. England  has  never  been  possessed  with  the  mad- 
ness of  brutality  and  pride  into  which  Germany  has  fallen 
in  defiance  of  her  former  greatness  and  of  all  that  is  sa- 
cred in  the  common  patrimony  of  mankind.  Since  moral 
causes  have  come  to  be  reckoned  in  the  conduct  of  nations, 


Imperialism  and  Empire  203 

England  has  shown  herself  respectful  of  the  obligations 
due  to  humanity  and  mindful  of  the  unwritten  law.  We 
encounter  this  dignity  and  this  lofty  conscientiousness 
even  in  certain  doctrines — outlived  today — which  reveal 
an  excessive  exuberance  of  race  vitality. 

Carlyle,  the  first  interpreter  of  imperialism,  expressed 
his  admiration  for  force  with  too  much  insistence.  His 
temperament  evidenced  a  disproportionate  share  of  that 
particularly  Saxon  quality,  energy;  similarly  his  work 
gave  proof  of  a  disproportionate  share  of  what  one  might 
call  "saxonism."  He  preached  the  gospel  of  energy;  he 
did  not  stop  short  of  an  apology  for  force.  Force,  he  said 
(and  in  that  he  was  right),  force  is  one  of  the  means  which 
nature  imposes  on  man  to  make  her  will  prevail.  Human 
concerns  are  complex  and  uncertain;  at  a  given  moment 
truth  is  but  partial  truth  and  perhaps  only  apparent; 
prejudices,  passions,  even  perversions  are  mixed  and 
entangled  with  just  and  disinterested  reasons,  in  such  a 
manner  that  it  is  difficult  to  know  what  order  of  motives 
we  obey.  Fortunately  there  exists  in  the  world,  through 
the  will  of  the  Creator,  a  fatality  for  good;  conflict  is  the 
tangible  form  which  its  evolution  assumes;  the  man — 
or  the  group  of  men — who  has  sufficient  moral  force  to 
persevere  in  the  struggle  even  unto  victory,  is  worthy  of 
victory.  ...  In  other  terms,  at  such  and  such  a  point  in 
duration,  force  is  equivalent  to  right.  That  is  getting 
dangerously  near  the  conclusion  formulated  by  Hegel 
and  put  into  practice  by  Bismarck,  Bernhardi,  and  their 
school.  But  let  us  look  a  little  closer  into  the  matter: 
there  is  really  only  a  semblance  of  similarity  between  the 
two  doctrines.  Carlyle  makes  allowance — perhaps  too 
great  allowance — for  force:  but  after  all  he  subordinates 
force  to  right.  In  his  thought,  which  was  strongly  in- 
fluenced by  German  thought,  there  is  a  little  too  much 
mystic  realism  suggesting  Hegel;  yet,  after  all,  he  dis- 


204  Imperialism  and  Empire 

claims  neither  English  wisdom  nor  human  reason.  In- 
stead of  abandoning  himself  as  Hegel  did,  to  the  fanaticism 
of  national  sentiment  and  the  adoration  of  established 
power,  Carlyle  upholds  the  rights  of  the  conscience  against 
this  power,  if  it  be  unjust,  and  against  national  sentiment 
itself  if  it  fall  into  error.  He  is  not  only  a  prophet  whose 
impassioned  homilies  summon  the  Anglo-Saxon  race  to 
lofty  destinies;  he  is  also  a  vehement  scoffing  critic, 
so  bitter  at  times  that  he  lacks  all  tact  and  judgment, 
and  upbraids  and  berates  his  countrymen  and  mankind, 
wholesale.  He  recognizes  an  immanent  justice,  superior 
to  the  will  of  the  powerful,  higher  than  all  interests,  even 
those  which  make  use  of  the  name  of  patriotism ;  such  is 
the  principle  of  eternal  right,  "never  realized  in  fact,  but 
burning  with  a  pure  flame  in  the  souls  of  heroes"  and 
revealing  itself  to  the  masses  in  transient  gleams  whenever 
criminal  enterprises  or  iniquitous  laws  violate  the  popular 
sense  of  justice.  Carlyle,  then,  admires  those  who  use 
force,  whenever  force  is  the  outward  expression  of  purified 
thought,  of  firmer  will,  of  more  steadfast  purpose  resulting 
from  intentions  truly  upright  and  disinterested.  When- 
ever he  takes  up  the  discussion  of  that  logically  associated 
couple,  right  and  might,  he  gives  precedence  to  right. 
For  example,  he  holds  that  right  and  force  are  at  any 
given  moment  terribly  different  from  each  other;  but  if 
you  give  them  centuries  wherein  to  be  put  to  the  test,  you 
will  find  them  identical. 

A  sentence  like  the  following  is  the  condemnation 
without  appeal  of  the  war  unchained  by  Germany  in 
1914: 

If  a  judgment  is  unjust,  it  will  not  and  cannot  get  harbour 
for  itself,  or  continue  to  have  footing  in  this  Universe,  which 
was  made  by  other  than  One  Unjust  ...  it  will  continue 
standing  for  its  day,  for  its  year, 'for  its  century,  doing  evil  all 


Imperialism  and  Empire  205 

the  while;  but  it  has  one  enemy  who  is  Almighty;  .  .  .  and 
the  deeper  its  rooting,  more  obstinate  its  continuing,  the 
deeper  also  and  huger  will  its  ruin  and  overturn  be. 


Thus  Right,  the  instrument  of  which  is  righteous  force, 
rises  inexorably  against  unjust  force. 

The  criterion  is  the  consent  of  the  totality  of  men.  A 
conquest  "which  renders  service  both  to  the  vanquished 
and  victors"  receives  the  sanction  of  equity.  If  Carlyle 
had  been  able  to  ascertain  the  truth  concerning  the  bar- 
barism whence  German  force  takes  its  source  and  the 
abhorrence  it  arouses  wherever  it  passes,  he  would  not 
have  looked  upon  it  with  the  favour  he  did  in  1870.  .  .  . 
In  reality  German  hypocrisy  had  beguiled  his  good  faith. 

English  imperialism,  which  owes  a  good  deal  to  Carlyle, 
did  not  long  retain  the  biblical  form  which  he  had  given 
it  in  his  apostrophes  to  the  "nation  elect,"  predestined 
"from  all  eternity"  to  see  the  universal  triumph  of  its 
genius;  but  it  has  kept  in  mind  the  moral  obligations 
which  Carlyle  imposed  on  it  as  a  protecting  and  civilizing 
force.  English  conquest  avoids  useless  violence:  English 
administration  is  beneficial  to  infant-peoples  whom  it 
saves  from  barbarism.  Wherever  English  law  is  es- 
tablished, tribal  warfare,  assaults  on  property,  personal 
acts  of  cruelty  cease.  Just  as  we  in  our  colonies,  so  the 
English  in  theirs  create  order  through  ties  of  affection 
and  gratitude:  that  is  why  their  native  troops,  like  our 
own  tirailleurs  of  Algeria,  of  Senegal,  and  Tonkin,  are 
devoted  to  them,  and  why  they  have  been  able  to  draw 
from  India  100,000  soldiers  ready  to  fight  the  good  fight 
with  them.  The  Germans,  on  the  other  hand,  find  the 
means  of  sowing  revolt  in  their  African  colonies,  as  well 
as  hatred  in  the  annexed  provinces  of  Europe.  They 
do  not  possess  that  gift  of  sympathy  which  permits  an 
English  or  French  colonial  to  enter  into  the  mentality  of 


206  Imperialism  and  Empire 

the  African  or  the  Oriental ;  wherever  they  go  they  trans- 
port German  arrogance,  German  routine,  and  that  mental 
inflexibility  which  in  administrative  matters  causes  them 
to  pursue  a  method  to  its  extreme  consequences  without' 
concern  for  humanity,  and  in  the  field  of  speculation,  to 
its  extreme  conclusions  without  concern  for  common 
sense.  By  dint  of  prudent  dealing  and  justice,  the  English 
have  solved  the  problem  of  getting  their  negro  subjects 
to  accept  taxation  as  a  benefit.  A  -Frenchwoman  who 
studied  their  administrative  methods  in  Nigeria  recently 
cited  the  following  detail : 

The  hour  for  paying  the  taxes  is  also  the  hour  in  which 
justice  is  rendered,  and  each  family  group  which  brings  its 
portion  of  millet,  its  young  goat,  or  sack  of  salt  understands 
that  this  represents  an  exchange,  a  contribution  paid  to  the 
white  man,  because  the  white  man  protects.  This  is  so 
true  that  a  civil  officer  among  the  Munchis  was  able  to 
use  the  following  threat  without  smiling:  "If  you  go  on 
fighting  with  the  neighbouring  tribe,  I  shall  not  come  among 
you  any  more  to  get  the  taxes  and  settle  your  quarrels.  ..." 

Kipling,  who  has  celebrated  in  verse  the  daring  and 
the  enterprising  spirit  of  "the  imperial  race,"  has  also 
solemnly  prescribed  its  code  of  duties  under  the  noble 
formula  of  the  White  Man's  Burden: 

Take  up  the  White  Man's  burden — 

Send  forth  the  best  ye  breed — 
Go  bind  your  sons  to  exile 

To  serve  your  captives'  need ; 
To  wait  in  heavy  harness, 

On  fluttered  flock  and  wild — 
Your  new-caught,  sullen  peoples, 

Half-devil  and  half-child. 


Imperialism  and  Empire  207 

Take  up  the  White  Man's  burden — 

In  patience  to  abide, 
To  veil  the  threat  of  terror 

And  check  the  show  of  pride; 
By  open  speech  and  simple, 

An  hundred  times  made  plain, 
To  seek  another's  profit, 

And  work  another's  gain. 

Take  up  the  White  Man's  burden — 

No  tawdry  rule  of  Kings, 
But  toil  of  serf  and  sweeper — 

The  tale  of  common  things. 
The  posts  ye  shall  not  enter, 

The  roads  ye  shall  not  tread, 
Go  make  them  with  your  living 

And  mark  them  with  your  dead. 

The  vigorous  pressure  of  colonizing  energy,  due  to 
the  growth  of  English  population,  to  the  development 
of  English  industry  and  the  movement  of  ideas  and 
sentiments  of  which  Carlyle  and,  later,  Kipling  were  the 
principal  interpreters,  resulted,  during  the  last  quarter 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  in  a  period  of  conquering  activity 
which  added  to  British  possessions  territories  equivalent 
to  a  third  of  Europe.  Under  the  direction  of  the  Con- 
servative Party  and  of  the  Colonial  Secretary,  Mr.  Cham- 
berlain, in  particular,  this  was  the  period  of  imperial 
expansion.  External  causes  no  less  than  internal  ones 
explain  the  movement.  The  entrance  of  all  the  great 
nations,  France,  Russia,  Germany,  and  latterly  Italy, 
into  the  competition  for  colonial  conquest  could  not 
leave  England  indifferent.  She  was  obliged  to  expand 
in  order  to  defend  her  frontiers  and  maintain  her  spheres 
of  influence  where  there  was  danger  that  she  might  be 
supplanted. 


2o8  Imperialism  and  Empire 

In  this  more  recent  history  of  the  extension  of  the 
British  Empire,  there  is  a  certain  chapter  which  should 
hold  our  attention,  notwithstanding  the  controversies 
which  it  has  provoked.  Precisely  because  it  is  a  some- 
what perilous  subject  for  discussion  I  shall  not  attempt 
to  elude  it:  it  is  the  Transvaal  problem.  Many  French- 
men have  been  insufficiently  informed  concerning  it,  and 
it  remains  in  their  memory  as  one  of  the  black  pages  of  the 
colonial  annals  of  England.  The  Transvaal  War  broke 
out  during  that  period  of  tension  between  France  and 
Great  Britain  in  which  the  two  countries,  in  conflict  for 
the  partition  of  Africa,  were  disputing  certain  territories 
foot  by  foot.  The  checkmate  of  Fashoda,  the  painful 
uselessness  of  the  heroism  spent  in  extending  our  Soudan 
as  far  as  the  great  lakes,  the  grim  determination  of  the 
English  Government  to  keep  us  from  approaching  the 
sources  of  the  river  to  which  Egypt  owes  its  fertility 
...  all  of  that  left  us  naturally  enough  with  a  certain 
feeling  of  rancour  ill-calculated  to  dispose  us  in  England's 
favour.  Through  generosity,  our  sympathy  inclined 
towards  the  intrepid  little  people  which  was  defending 
its  independence  against  a  powerful  nation.  This  sym- 
pathy was  not  ill-directed ;  our  generosity  was  not  ill-spent 
on  the  unworthy;  the  bravery  of  the  Boers,  their  in- 
domitable determination  to  yield  only  after  having  ex- 
hausted all  possible  means  of  resistance,  their  boldness 
in  the  offensive,  their  ingenuity  on  the  defensive,  deserved 
the  admiration  which  we  felt  for  them.  England,  herself, 
when  the  war  was  over,  rendered  them  due  homage  in  the 
noble  fashion  she  is  wont  to  adopt  with  courageous  and 
chivalrous  adversaries.  The  Boers  were  worthy  of 
conserving  their  racial  characteristics,  their  customs  and 
self-government,  their  traditions  and  their  particular 
aspirations;  and  these  they  now  possess.  These  are  as- 
sured to  them  forever  under  the  same  liberal  guarantees 


Imperialism  and  Empire  209 

which  prevail  in  the  relations  of  England  with  all  the 
parts  of  her  Empire. 

The  question  which  we  are  to  examine  is  the  question 
whether  England,  in  reducing  the  obstinacy  of  the  Boers, 
committed  one  of  those  odious  and  cynical  violations  of 
right,  of  which  Germany  furnished  the  example  in  tearing 
Alsace-Lorraine  from  us,  and  Austria  in  wishing  to  force 
Servia  under  the  yoke  of  Germanism.  The  question  is 
whether — however  painful  the  violence  done  the  Boers 
may  have  been — England  did  not  obey  certain  justifiable 
motives,  and  perhaps  a  certain  unavoidable  necessity. 
Do  we  not  find  ourselves  in  presence  of  one  of  those  insolu- 
ble conflicts  that  history  furnishes,  in  which  the  forces  of 
the  past,  worthy  of  respect  in  all  that  goes  to  make  up  the 
beauty  of  venerable  things,  encounter  the  forces  of  the 
present,  deservedly  legitimate  in  all  that  gives  value  to 
progress?  The  conflict  may  be  deferred  but  not  avoided. 
Its  conclusion  is  decreed  from  the  first:  the  phases  of 
the  drama  are  harrowing  as  much  for  the  suffering  en- 
dured as  for  the  fraction  of  human  nobleness  destroyed. 
At  least  in  this  case  we  know  that  the  living  anomaly 
recently  called  the  Transvaal  Republic  did  not  succomb 
to  an  aggression  of  shameful  appetites,  and  that  all  that 
was  noble  therein  was  destined  to  flourish  again — has  in- 
deed reflourished  already — under  a  new  form  in  a  reju- 
venated society. 

The  Transvaal  question  was  so  complex  that  it  divided 
England  itself.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  apparent  pro- 
vocation of  certain  acts  of  the  English  is  explained  by  the 
lack  of  continuity  in  their  policy,  by  the  disorder  into 
which  they  were  thrown  by  the  differences  of  opinion 
between  the  parties,  between  the  successive  cabinets, 
and  between  the  governments  of  the  Metropolis  and  Cape 
Colony.  The  sharp  and  instant  grievances  of  the  Trans- 
vaal Outlanders,  that  is  to  say  of  the  English  engineers, 
14 


2io  Imperialism  and  Empire 

business  men,  and  merchants  established  in  the  gold- 
bearing  region  of  the  Rand,  coupled  with  the  menacing 
armaments  of  President  Kruger,  were  necessary  to  induce 
all  the  English  to  adopt  the  policy  of  armed  intervention. 
The  fact  that  until  the  last  moment  there  existed  a  party 
of  generous  and  enlightened  men  to  defend  the  already 
doomed  but  noble  cause  of  conciliation  and  peace  reflects 
honour  on  the  country.  If  there  was  aggression,  this 
aggression  was  not  produced  as  in  the  case  of  Germany 
and  Austria  in  1914,  under  the  unanimous  impulse  of 
national  error,  in  a  violent  eruption  of  covetous  and 
unbridled  passions. 

The  study  of  the  circumstances  which  preceded  the 
final  act  will  show  us  that  there  is  no  parallel  between  this 
painful  episode  of  British  imperialism,  which,  after  the 
victory,  threw  England's  liberalism  and  sense  of  justice 
into  clear  relief  and  the  unpardonable  episode  of  Germanic 
imperialism,  destined,  if  it  succeeded,  to  efface  Belgium 
,  and  Servia  from  the  map  of  Europe  and  to  subjugate  the 
world. 

The  Dutch  pioneers  who  emigrated  from  Cape  Colony 
in  1833,  through  inclination  towards  a  nomadic  life,  into 
the  open  air  of  the  Veldt,  enjoyed  full  liberty  to  organize 
a  small  society  of  hunters  and  cattle-raisers  under  the 
Republican  form.  Up  to  1877,  England  maintained  only 
a  neighbourly  attitude  towards  them,  an  attitude  which 
might  have  continued  had  they  themselves  not  introduced 
a  change  in  their  situation.  Their  existence  has  been 
represented,  not  without  purposeful  partiality,  in  idyllic 
colours.  In  reality  the  •  Boers  were  very  far  removed 
from  the  shepherds  of  Theocritus  or  Virgil.  The  sons  of 
adventurous  emigrants,  and  themselves  brought  up  to 
brave  the  dangers  and  to  taste  the  emotions  of  a  roving 
life,  they  were  particularly  fond  of  hunting  and  war. 
One  of  their  occupations  consisted  in  undertaking  periodic 


Imperialism  and  Empire  211 

raids  into  the  territories  of  the  savage  tribes  which  sur- 
rounded them.  In  1877,  the  warlike  Zulus  answered  attack 
with  attack  and  went  so  far  as  to  threaten  President 
Kruger  in  his  capital.  The  Boers  called  on  the  English 
for  help :  the  Zulus  were  driven  out  of  the  country  and  the 
supremacy  of  the  white  race  was  re-established  in  South 
Africa. 

This  occurred  at  a  time  when  new  prospects  were  open- 
ing in  Africa  for  the  great  nations  of  Europe.  The  new 
continent  had  been  largely  explored  and  its  riches  inven- 
toried :  colonies  established  along  the  coast  had  prospered ; 
raw  materials  and  products  of  the  soil  offered  important 
resources  to  commerce  and  industry;  it  appeared  that  the 
productive  activity  of  the  colonizing  peoples  would  find 
a  source  of  supply  in  Africa  as  well  as  a  good  market. 
England  and  France  had  commenced  their  policy  of  ex- 
pansion there;  Germany  had  made  up  her  mind,  some- 
what late,  to  enter  into  competition  with  them;  Italy  was 
thinking  of  taking  rank  with  the  other  powers.  Under 
the  influence  'of  Beaconsfield,  English  imperialism  had 
become  a  government  doctrine  and  one  of  the  forces 
of  public  opinion.  Under  these  conditions,  it  can  be 
understood  that  an  enterprising  government,  desirous  of 
smoothing  the  way  for  future  progress  in  a  region  where 
it  had  important  establishments,  should  have  thought  of 
incorporating  into  its  possessions  the  little  republic  which 
had  just  given  evidence  of  its  inability  to  defend  itself 
against  the  neighbouring  black  populations.  It  was  not  a 
question  of  violent  absorption  or  of  forced  assimilation 
by  methods  which  Germany  is  employing  in  Alsace- 
Lorraine  and  in  Poland;  but  of  federation,  under  British 
suzerainty  and  under  the  protection  of  British  liberty. 
.  .  .  The  spirit  of  savage  independence  in  the  Boers  re- 
belled. For  a  period  of  three  years,  they  prepared  for 
war;  then,  taking  advantage  of  the  moment  when  the  Tory 


212  Imperialism  and  Empire 

ministry  was  replaced  by  a  Liberal  cabinet,  they  attacked 
and  defeated  the  small  English  garrison  at  Majuba- 
Hill.  Blood  had  been  spilled;  one  of  those  fatalities 
engaging  the  national  honour  had  occurred;  never- 
theless the  Liberal  Premier,  Gladstone,  who  was  hostile 
in  principle  to  colonial  enterprises,  made  no  attempt 
to  "revenge"  the  English  defeat.  He  was  content  to 
affirm  the  nominal  suzerainty  of  England  and  let  the 
question  sleep. 

Unfortunately,  so  grave  a  question,  on  which  partly 
depended  the  future  of  English  colonization  on  the  East 
Coast  of  Africa,  could  not  be  treated  by  mere  neglect. 
It  was  soon  seen  that  this  was  true.  Two  events  happened 
to  give  a  particular  importance  to  the  Transvaal:  first, 
the  discovery  of  very  important  mineral  riches ;  secondly, 
the  occupation  of  Egypt  by  England.  These  two  events 
brought  about  the  public  appearance  of  the  daring  Cecil 
Rhodes.  The  Rand  gold  mines,  in  the  vicinity  of  Johan- 
nesburg, were  found  to  be  among  the  richest  in  the  world. 
This  happened  at  a  time  when  the  scarcity  of  gold  was  so 
appreciable  on  the  London  market  that  the  entire  monetary 
economy  of  Great  Britain  was  affected.  A  formidable 
"rush"  of  prospectors,  speculators,  engineers  and  of  all 
of  those  traders  which  a  camp  of  gold-seekers  allures, 
brought  to  the  Transvaal  an  enormous  population  of 
British  subjects,  whom  the  Boers  regarded  with  disdain 
and  later  with  suspicion.  For  them,  it  was  belittling 
oneself  to  dig  the  earth,  to  become  the  slave  of  a  machine, 
and  to  count  columns  of  figures,  instead  of  practising  the 
noble  occupation  of  hunting  big  game,  or,  when  there  was 
a  good  opportunity,  of  hunting  the  Matabele  or  the  Zulu. 
They  submitted  most  reluctantly  to  the  presence  of  the 
Outlanders — intruders  separated  from  them  by  blood  and 
by  a  long  stage  of  civilization.  The  struggle  between 
the  past  and  the  present  was  henceforth  engaged.  It 


Imperialism  and  Empire  213 

was  carried  on  at  first  peacefully  by  Cecil  Rhodes  in  a 
broad  spirit  of  conciliation. 

Rhodes  was  not,  as  he  has  been  represented  sometimes 
in  France,  an  unscrupulous  adventurer,  who,  having 
become  "diamond  King"  and  Premier  of  Cape  Colony, 
employed  in  the  service  of  the  Colony  and  of  the  Metropo- 
lis the  doubtful  system  of  morals  which  under  favour- 
able circumstances  leads  on  to  riches  and  power.  His 
character  exhibited  certain  intimately  allied  yet  contra- 
dictory qualities  which  are  sometimes  observed  in  the 
English  mind:  on  the  one  hand,  enterprise,  daring,  and 
vast  ambition  for  his  country;  on  the  other,  an  element 
of  idealism  allied  to  the  best  of  human  thought  in  all 
times. 

The  son  of  a  clergyman,  he  had  had  a  good  classical 
education  before  going  to  the  Cape  to  tempt  fortune  as 
a  diamond  hunter.  His  genius  for  organization  led  him 
to  rise  in  a  few  years  to  the  position  of  overseer  and 
later  to  that  of  owner  of  the  famous  mines  of  Kimberly. 
A  millionaire  at  thirty  years  of  age,  he  returned  and 
took  his  place  once  more  on  the  benches  of  Oxford  without 
neglecting  his  business  interests,  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
freshing himself  at  the  fountain-head  of  the  spirit  of 
liberty  and  leadership,  whence  the  English  ruling  class 
and  the  colonial  personnel  derive  their  force.  It  was  not, 
then,  as  a  parvenu  in  business  and  politics,  but  as  a  states- 
man nourished  with  the  historical  traditions  and  substance 
of  British  thought,  that  he  assumed  the  direction  of  affairs 
at  the  Cape.  From  the  outset,  he  distinguished  himself 
in  his  position  by  the  breadth  of  his  views. 

England  had  established  herself  in  Egypt  and  had  been 
led  by  the  necessity  of  her  new  position  to  extend  her 
power  as  far  as  the  great  lakes.  Why  should  she  not 
advance  from  the  Cape  towards  the  North,  to  encounter 
in  Central  Africa  the  southern  extremity  of  Egyptian 


214  Imperialism  and  Empire 

Soudan?  The  English  possessions  would  thus  form  an 
immense  domain,  a  single  stretch,  extending  over  the 
east  of  Africa,  from  Alexandria  to  the  Cape;  a  railway 
line  was  to  run  through  it;  one  of  the  finest  fields  of 
activity  which  has  ever  been  opened  to  human  enterprise 
was  to  be  realized.  This  colossal  dream  pre-supposed  a 
union  concluded  between  the  English  Colony  of  the  Cape 
and  the  Boer  Republics  of  the  Orange  Free  State  and 
of  the  Transvaal.  Rhodes  worked  to  bring  about  the 
federation  of  South  Africa.  He  found  President  Brand 
of  the  Orange  Free  State  favourably  disposed  to  his  plan, 
which  was  to  leave  the  participating  states  political 
independence  and  to  furnish  the  guarantee  of  English 
imperial  power  for  their  security.  But  these  excellent 
intentions  were  reduced  to  nought  by  the  obstinacy  of 
Kruger.  Kruger  intrigued  in  the  Cape  Parliament 
through  the  agency  of  trusty  adherents,  stirred  up  racial 
hatred  in  the  Orange  State,  and  rendered  any  friendly 
understanding  impossible.  Before  long  the  colonial 
ambition  of  Germany  in  West  Africa  furnished  him  a 
solid  support. 

After  Bismarck  had  taken  possession  of  the  Damaraland, 
President  Kruger,  it  was  noticed,  made  a  voyage  to 
Berlin.  .  .  .  During  the  dinner  which  was  offered  him 
at  Potsdam,  he  pronounced  the  following  words  ad- 
dressed to  the  Emperor:  "It  is  by  the  favour  of  God 
that  we  are  able  to  regard  your  Majesty  and  the  German 
Empire  with  looks  of  affection  and  confidence."  William 
II.,  without  replying  (for  he  had  to  be  cautious  with  Eng- 
land, who  was  still  friendly  and  unsuspecting  with  regard 
to  Germany's  world  policy),  rose,  shook  the  hands  of  his 
guest  with  emotion,  and  gave  him  the  accolade.  This 
happened  in  1884.  German  friendship  could  go  no 
farther  than  that,  for  England,  having  had  wind  of  a 
trans-African  railway  project  which  was  to  unite  the 


Imperialism  and  Empire  215 

German  colony  on  the  west  with  the  Transvaal  at  the 
east,  had  had  her  troops  occupy  Buchanaland  in  Central 
Africa,  and  had  put  a  stop  to  the  German-Boer  enterprise. 
The  tacit  encouragement  of  the  Emperor,  however,  was 
well  calculated  to  strengthen  Kruger's  obstinacy. 

From  this  time  on,  Kruger  kept  up  a  mute  struggle, 
by  means  of  intrigue  abroad  and  by  measures  prejudicial 
to  the  Outlanders  within  the  country.  The  mines  of  the 
Rand  were  furnishing  most  of  the  riches  of  the  country: 
yet  100,000  English  who  were  exploiting  them  were  put 
beyond  the  pale  of  the  law.  Crushed  under  taxes,  obliged 
to  construct  their  own  roads,  deprived  of  schools  for  their 
children,  and  of  all  city  improvements  in  their  town  of 
Johannesburg,  forced  to  buy  dynamite  at  exorbitant  prices 
and  subject  to  prohibitive  tariffs  on  the  Delagoa-Bay 
railroad,  they  were  even  refused  the  right  to  vote,  by 
which  they  hoped  to  make  their  grievances  heard.  The 
situation  was  intolerable.  One  can  understand — without 
being  able  to  excuse  the  act — the  coup  de  force  attempted 
by  Jameson,  who  at  the  head  of  a  few  resolute  horsemen 
tried  to  lay  hands  on  Kruger  and  the  Government.  The 
raid  did  not  succeed.  But  the  bitterness  which  it  left  in 
both  camps  rendered  war  inevitable.  Kruger  made  the 
most  of  the  time  from  1895  to  1897  to  provide  the  Army 
with  artillery  bought  in  France  and  Germany.  When 
hostilities  broke  out  spontaneously,  so  to  speak,  the 
Boers,  who  were  incomparable  marksmen  and  expert  in 
all  the  wiles  of  hunting,  also  proved  themselves  excellent 
tacticians.  It  is  a  matter  of  history  that  England  pre- 
vailed only  at  the  price  of  very  heavy  sacrifices. 

An  active  minority  in  England  protested  against  the 
Jameson  raid  and  against  the  war  itself.  All  the  objec- 
tions which  could  legitimately  appeal  to  sentiment  and 
conscience  in  this  painful  Transvaal  affair  found  their 
interpreters.  But  the  complexity  of  the  problem  and 


216  Imperialism  and  Empire 

the  action  of  forces  more  powerful  than  the  immediate 
interests  concerned  rendered  a  peaceful  solution  im- 
possible. At  bottom,  it  was  really  a  question  of  a  conflict 
between  a  modern  industrial  community  and  a  form  of 
society  going  as  far  back  as  the  age  of  the  hunter  or 
shepherd.  From  another  point  of  view,  it  was  also  a 
question  of  principle,  which  England — not  only  the 
imperialist  England  of  Joseph  Chamberlain,  but  also  the 
moderate  and  sober-minded  England  of  today — cannot 
abandon — the  principle  of  the  cohesion  of  the  Empire.  In 
a  parallel  case,  would  the  French  permit  the  Principality 
of  Monaco  to  thrust  itself  like  a  wedge  between  the  Comte 
de  Nice  and  the  Provence?  Similarly,  the  200,000  Boers 
of  the  Transvaal  threatened  to  cut  the  English  East- 
African  possessions  in  two.  The  problem  to  be  solved 
was  then — all  due  allowance  being  made — the  problem 
which  the  United  States  of  North  America  solved  against 
the  Southern  States  by  the  war  of  1861. 

Although  the  restless  and  uncompromising  spirit  which 
for  a  time  marked  English  imperialism  may  have  some- 
times inspired  colonials  of  the  Jameson  school  to  adopt 
regrettable  measures  with  regard  to  the  Transvaal,  it  may 
be  asked  whether  the  restless  and  uncompromising  spirit 
of  the  Boers  would  ever  have  permitted  them  to  be  won 
peacefully  to  a  federative  policy  in  South  Africa.  What- 
ever may  have  been  England's  wrongs,  she  did  not  act 
cynically  through  a  spirit  of  plunder.  As  soon  as  imperial 
unity  was  achieved,  she  generously  granted  the  Boers 
self-government  and  the  general  direction  of  their  desti- 
nies. Today,  one  of  the  generals  of  Boer  independence, 
General  Botha,  is  President  of  the  Federation  and  governs 
both  English  and  Boers  according  to  the  traditions  of 
British  liberty.  A  party  of  Boer  scouts  is  fighting  with 
the  English  troops  against  the  Austro-German  coalition,  a 
Boer  contingent  has  dislodged  the  Germans  from  German 


Imperialism  and  Empire  217 

West  Africa;  another  will  probably  achieve  the  conquest 
of  German  East  Africa.  What  better  proof  could  be 
furnished  that  barriers  of  injustice  no  longer  exist  between 
the  adversaries  of  former  days,  and  that  the  war  of 
1900  has  not  left  any  bitter  memory  in  the  minds  of  the 
Transvaalian  ? 

There  is  something  further.  The  painful  necessity 
which  obliged  England  to  resort  to  force  against  a  people 
of  European  race,  whose  obstinacy  she  had  to  overcome 
but  whose  determination  and  courage  she  admired,  led 
her  to  submit  to  a  conscientious  self-examination.  The 
Conservative  party,  which  was  extremely  imperialistic, 
fell  from  power:  Mr.  Chamberlain  lost  all  credit.  The 
Liberals  of  today  have  given  up  the  principle  of  expansion 
and  have  adopted  "union-imperialism."  In  the  following 
pages  I  shall  explain  upon  what  traditions  and  upon  what 
principles  rests  the  cohesion  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  race,  in 
one  great  family,  the  members  of  which,  free  and  animated 
with  the  individualist  spirit,  live  their  particular  lives, 
pursue  their  particular  ends,  defend  their  own  interests, 
and  yet  find  themselves  united  in  the  hour  of  peril  to  save 
England  and  the  English  ideal  from  belittlement  or 
destruction.  But  I  should  like  to  conclude  this  part  of 
my  subject  by  specifying  how  much  progress  the  English 
have  made  since  the  days  of  Carlyle. 

The  English  remain  a  people  of  energetic  and  daring 
initiative  but  they  no  longer  exercise  this  initiative  to 
increase  their  share  of  property  in  the  world,  a  share 
already  so  vast  that  their  task  of  owners  seems  too  heavy 
for  their  shoulders.  They  have  no  other  desire  than 
to  civilize,  humanize,  and  teach.  Force  still  remains  a 
necessity  to  put  a  restraint  upon  perversity  or  to  reduce 
error.  But  they  wish  to  restore  force  to  its  simplest  ex- 
pression: they  no  longer  admire  force  in  itself.  At  home 
their  mission  is  to  complete  the  work  of  justice  towards 


218  Imperialism  and  Empire 

the  disinherited,  and  abroad,  the  work  of  humanity 
towards  the  feeble  and  backward.  For  these  ends  they 
desire  peace:  their  position  is  purely  defensive.  Their 
idealism  has  grown  broader  and  richer;  it  is  limited  less 
strictly  than  before  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  race  and  to 
Anglo-Saxon  sensitiveness,  imagination,  and  ambition. 
It  seeks  its  inspiration  more  in  the  universality  of  human 
thought — that  is  to  say  in  that  "humanism, "  which  is  the 
moral  sense  of  the  citizen  world,  which  unites  the  great 
men  of  antiquity  and  the  founders  of  modern  wisdom  in 
the  same  spiritual  communion.  I  should  like  to  cite  as  a 
proof  of  this  the  article  published  by  the  distinguished 
Oxford  professor,  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  on  the  morrow  of  the 
declaration  of  war.  He  makes  use  of  the  title  "Might  is 
Right"  not  with  the  idea  of  paying  a  tribute  of  appro- 
bation to  the  German  doctrine,  but  of  demonstrating  its 
horror,  and,  furthermore,  its  stupidity.  Carlyle  is  rather 
severely  handled,  because,  despite  the  value  of  his  moral 
precepts,  his  admiration  for  force  carries  him  down  a 
dangerous  slope.  Since  1870,  Germany's  aberration  as  a 
nation  has  revealed  the  germ  of  madness  which  lies 
dormant  in  the  worship  of  force  when  it  is  pushed  to  the 
extreme  of  fanaticism.  At  the  end  of  the  course  the 
final  result  is  bestiality:  the  Urvolk  of  Fichte  becomes 
the  "blond  beast"  of  Nietzsche.  Sir  Walter  does  not 
deny  the  cousinship  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  and  the  Germans, 
but  he  prefers  recalling  the  importance  of  the  Latin  and 
Celtic  elements  in  the  race.  "The  English  are  a  very 
mixed  people,  with  enormous  infusions  of  Celtic  as  well 
as  of  Latin  blood.  The  museum  of  Roman  sculpture  at 
Naples  is  full  of  English  faces."  Then  again  there  was 
too  much  mystic  fatalism  in  the  faith  of  Carlyle,  that 
is,  an  excess  of  that  Germanic  vice,  romanticism.  Con- 
temporary England  has  learned  the  beauty  and  the 
force  of  rationalism,  that  is  of  the  thought  which  examines 


Imperialism  and  Empire  219 

itself,  of  conscience  which  keeps  in  touch  with  the  truths 
taught  by  the  Greek  philosophers,  the  Latin  law-makers, 
the  fathers  of  Christianity,  the  great  modern  thinkers 
universally  recognized  as  masters. 

"Might  is  Right" :  what  else  does  the  term  mean  in  the 
German  acceptation,  if  not:  Might  is  Might?  But  in 
another  sense,  that  which  a  consensus  of  opinion  proclaims 
openly,  the  term  signifies  that  there  exists  a  force  superior 
to  the  brutal  arbitrage  of  arms,  a  force  of  sympathy,  of 
justice,  of  beauty,  and  of  righteousness,  which  finally 
carries  the  day  even  against  "the  shining  armour"  and  the 
"mailed  fist"  .  .  .  and  that  force  is  called  Right.  .  .  . 
The  contrary  doctrine,  the  doctrine  held  by  the  Germans, 
has  rendered  them  obtuse.  For  have  they  not  finally 
become  hypnotized  in  contemplating  the  blade  of  their 
sword  ?  and  has  not  this  led  them  to  the  point  where  they 
no  longer  know  anything  of  other  peoples  and  no  longer 
understand  humanity?  Again,  how  was  it  possible 
unless  the  craze  of  force  had  blinded  them,  how  was  it 
possible  for  them  not  to  perceive  that  a  spirit  of  revolt 
was  astir  in  the  world  ?  Is  there  not  a  sign  of  their  demen- 
tia in  their  not  understanding  that  humanity  was  weary, 
or,  to  use  the  very  fitting  expression  of  Gabriel  Seailles, 
that  "indignation  had  killed  fear"?  They  set  the  other 
peoples  at  naught:  the  other  peoples'  answer  was  scorn 
for  their  colossal  scarecrow — force! 

In  presence  of  the  dishonour  and  abasement  of  Ger- 
many, England,  like  ourselves,  has  become  more  steadfast 
in  the  service  of  justice,  promising  herself  that  she  would 
use  forceful  means  only  to  bring  about  the  triumph 
of  right.  .  .  .  The  days  of  conquering  imperialism  are 
over;  what  is  left  is  that  admirable  and  noble  achieve- 
ment, the  Empire,  a  corporate  being  animated  with  a 
single  soul  and  united  by  ties  of  affection,  respect,  and 
liberty. 


22O  Imperialism  and  Empire 

SECOND  PART:  UNION-IMPERIALISM 

The  colonial  history  of  England,  like  all  history,  is  a 
succession  of  splendid  pages  and  sombre  pages,  of  glorious 
doings  and  acts  of  selfishness,  of  magnanimous  traits 
and  vulgar  passions.  Human  action  under  whatever 
form  it  occurs,  individual  or  national,  is  thus  composed 
of  the  best  and  worst,  and  offers  the  moralist  nought  but  a 
varied  pageant  of  humanity's  doings.  Yet,  the  English 
nation,  although  seeking  its  interests,  at  times  blindly 
and  avidly  possesses  that  particular  nobleness  which 
has  enabled  it,  in  the  light  of  experience,  to  recognize 
and  repair  its  faults.  While  certain  men  have  fallen  into 
error  and  have  allowed  themselves  to  be  carried  away  by 
cupidity,  other  parties  and  other  men  have  openly  recog- 
nized the  voice  of  truth  or  of  justice.  In  short,  the 
nation  has  increasingly  progressed  towards  a  higher 
conception  of  political  liberty,  towards  a  nobler  notion  of 
the  duties  of  the  strong  towards  the  weak,  of  those  in 
power  towards  the  governed,  and  of  one  man  towards 
another.  It  is  owing  to  this  independence  of  criticism 
in  Parliament  and  in  the  nation,  to  this  firmness  of 
principle  among  the  better  classes,  to  this  ever-increasing 
clearness  and  sincerity  of  conscience  more  and  more 
inspiring  government  action,  that  England's  colonial  his- 
tory has  so  often  reached  the  summits  which  mark  the 
way  for  other  nations.  The  British  Empire  consoli- 
dated into  an  indestructible  whole  by  powerful  ties  of 
moral  attraction  furnishes  the  most  praiseworthy  example 
of  political  creation,  notwithstanding  the  diversity  of  in- 
terests and  races,  which  the  world  has  known  since  the 
dissolution  of  the  Roman  Empire.  In  following  the 
stages  of  its  development  and  in  noting  the  phases  of 
ideas  which  have  presided  over  this  development,  we  shall 
be  in  a  position  to  appreciate  the  generosity  and  prudence 


Imperialism  and  Empire  221 

— instinctive  or  acquired — of  the  English  as  a  colonizing 
people.  These  qualities  will  appear  in  a  more  vivid  light 
in  contrast  with  German  methods. 

In  the  sixteenth,  seventeenth,  and  eighteenth  centuries, 
English  colonial  policy,  although  comparatively  humane, 
did  not  introduce  any  novelty  into  the  relations  commonly 
admitted  in  those  times  between  the  colonizing  countries 
and  distant  conquered  territories.  The  colonies  were 
considered  to  be  possessions  from  which  it  was  lawful 
to  draw  all  the  revenue  possible  without  regard  to  the 
rights  of  the  occupants.  It  was  the  time  when  slavery  was 
considered  to  be  the  legitimate  law  which  the  strong  might 
impose  on  the  weak,  and  the  ruling  races  on  the  inferior 
races.  When  a  tide  of  emigration,  determined  by  re- 
ligious persecution,  had  carried  over  important  groups  of 
English  colonists  towards  the  temperate  climates  of  North 
America,  and  after  New  England,  New  Holland,  Penn- 
sylvania, had  become  veritable  English  provinces  beyond 
the  seas,  a  colonial  administration  was  set  up  which  was 
honest  in  character,  respectful  of  justice,  but  not  very 
liberal.  The  idea  of  treating  these  new  British  lands, 
politically  and  administratively,  as  the  British  people  were 
treated  at  home  was  never  really  entertained.  The  home 
government  assumed  an  air  of  sovereign  authority  in  the 
matter.  The  population,  although  of  English  blood,  was 
considered  as  a  population  of  subjects,  liable  to  taxation 
and  to  statute-labour,  as  were  the  French,  for  instance, 
under  the  regime  of  the  absolute  monarchy — and  not  at 
all  as  Britons,  naturally  protected  against  arbitrary  deal- 
ing through  the  extension  to  outlying  countries  of  the 
constitutional  guarantees  assured  to  English  citizens. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  there  oc- 
curred two  movements  of  the  highest  importance  for  the 
future  of  English  colonization:  first  in  the  colonies  of 


222  Imperialism  and  Empire 

America,  the  movement  of  revolt  destined  to  result  in 
the  independence  of  these  colonies,  and  ultimately  in 
the  liberation  of  the  other  colonies  settled  by  the  white 
race;  secondly  at  home  in  the  mother-country,  with 
reference  to  India,  a  protest  against  any  unscrupulous 
exploitation  of  the  inferior  races.  This  protest  was  des- 
tined to  result  in  the  triumph  of  honesty  and  humanity 
in  the  methods  of  government  and  administration  when- 
ever, in  presence  of  the  unfitness  of  the  peoples  to  govern 
themselves,  it  was  necessary  to  delegate  part  of  the 
central  power  to  English  functionaries  and  to  maintain 
order  by  acts  of  authority.  The  spokesman  of  both  these 
movements  was  the  great  statesman  whose  preponderating 
r61e  and  decisive  intervention  in  the  constitutional  history 
of  England  we  have  already  discussed  .  .  .  Edmund 
Burke. 

India,  towards  1780,  was  in  the  hands  of  the  East  India 
Company  to  which  the  English  Government  had  entrusted 
the  duty  of  keeping  order,  as  well  as  the  task  of  agricultural 
exploitation  and  commercial  organization.  Thus  left  to 
themselves  and  under  cover  of  the  general  indifference 
with  regard  to  the  fate  of  the  natives,  the  functionaries 
and  business  agents  of  the  Company  recognized  no  other 
law  than  that  of  success.  Daring,  skill,  enterprise,  and 
talent  for  organization  were  translated  into  terms  of 
shareholders'  profits,  all  acts  of  cruelty  or  betrayal,  all 
methods  of  fraud  or  cynicism  were  overlooked.  It  was 
thought  natural  that  Clive  should  have  duped  the  Rajah 
Omichund  by  producing  a  false  signature;  that  Impey 
should  have  had  Nuncomar  hanged  for  the  same  fault  of 
which  Clive  had  been  guilty,  although  forgery  is  not  a 
grave  offence  according  to  the  Hindoo  code  of  morals,  while 
it  is  a  crime  according  to  the  European  code ;  that  Warren 
Hastings  should  have  lent  English  troops  to  aid  in  the 
extermination  of  a  tribe  with  whom  he  had  made  a  pact 


Imperialism  and  Empire  223 

of  peace;  that  Benfield  should  have  been  associated  with 
an  Oriental  potentate  to  put  into  effect  a  policy  of  extor- 
'tion  at  the  expense  of  his  subjects.  These  "nabobs" 
were  honoured  when  they  returned  to  England  with  their 
coffers  full  of  gold,  and  spent  their  fortunes  royally  in 
mansions,  in  pomp,  in  hunting,  and  in  generous  donations 
left  in  the  hands  of  the  party  leaders.  But  Burke  was 
keeping  watch.  He  used  his  eloquence  in  the  service  of  the 
rights  of  the  conquered  peoples.  His  protest  against  the 
practices  of  fraud  and  rapine  which  threatened  to  debase 
the  conscience  of  the  nation,  encountered  keen  opposition 
at  the  outset  but  silently  made  its  way  into  the  heart 
of  the  nation.  He  accused  Warren  Hastings  before  the 
House  of  Lords,  sitting  as  a  High  Court.  The  trial 
lasted  six  years.  The  cause  was  not  sufficiently  matured 
to  permit  of  honesty  and  eloquence  triumphing  over 
corruption  and  the  fascination  of  success.  Nevertheless, 
despite  a  temporary  check,  the  intervention  of  Burke 
prepared  the  downfall  of  the  East  India  Company  and 
the  establishment  of  a  state  administration  which  was 
to  become,  in  time,  the  famous  Civil  Service,  recruited 
among  the  best  University  graduates  and  very  generally 
admired  for  its  high  competency,  its  disinterestedness, 
and  its  dignity. 

In  the  question  of  the  colonies  of  America,  Burke  did 
not  win  the  immediate  success  which  the  logic  and  the 
generosity  of  his  point  of  view  merited;  the  disastrous 
consequences  of  the  contrary  policy,  however,  retro- 
spectively lent  an  irresistible  force  to  his  arguments. 
The  principles  which  he  laid  down  became  the  very  basis 
of  the  future  relations  of  England  with  her  colonies.  His 
two  speeches  On  American  Taxation  and  On  Conciliation 
with  America  have  come  down  to  us,  thanks  to  their  broad 
and  generous  ideas,  as  classics  of  English  political  science. 


224  Imperialism  and  Empire 

About  1775.  a  strong  current  of  independence  was 
noticeable  in  the  political  literature  and  in  the  popular 
centres  of  England  precisely  at  the  time  when  the  Contrat 
Social  in  France  was  popularizing  the  first  democratic 
demands.  Certain  small  but  enterprising  groups  of 
citizens,  deprived  of  the  right  of  vote,  were  exerting 
themselves,  not  indeed  dangerously,  and  yet  with  sufficient 
effect  to  disturb  the  Government  and  the  ruling  oligarchy. 
There  was  rioting,  without  gravity  but  indicative  of  a 
certain  spirit  of  uneasiness.  This  outcrop  of  individualis- 
tic and  democratic  feeling — a  forewarning  of  the  great 
movement  which,  fifteen  years  later,  was  to  occasion  the 
great  Revolution  in  France — had  its  rebound  in  America 
where  it  incited  the  colonists  who  had  no  deliberative 
voice  in  the  affairs  of  their  own  country  to  refuse  the  new 
taxes  which  the  Metropolis  wished  to  impose  and  to  which 
they  had  not  consented.  There  was  co-relation  between 
the  spirit  of  revolt  which  manifested  itself  in  America 
and  the  demands  for  the  extension  of  the  right  to  vote 
which,  in  such  popular  movements  as  that  headed  by 
the  agitator  Wilkes,  were  forcing  attention  in  England. 
Those  in  power  were  aware  of  the  state  of  affairs,  yet  they 
braced  themselves  in  an  uncompromising  attitude  of 
resistance.  This  resistance  triumphed  over  the  riots 
of  London  but  was  to  be  of  no  avail  against  the  insurrec- 
tion of  Boston. 

Burke  had  no  sympathy  for  democracy:  it  was  not  in 
the  name  of  the  "rights  of  man"  that  he  defended  the 
American  colonists.  But  instinctively  through  fidelity 
to  the  traditions  of  English  liberty  he  wished  to  secure 
for  all  English  citizens — in  whatever  land  they  had  settled 
— the  guarantees  of  the  parliamentary  regime.  The 
practical  means  of  avoiding  the  catastrophe,  the  distant 
rumbling  of  which  was  becoming  a  menace,  was,  he  said, 
to  grant  to  all  Englishmen,  whether  in  distant  lands  or  in 


Imperialism  and  Empire  225 

the  mother  country,  the  benefit  of  the  immunities  of  the 
Constitution.  Hence,  in  his  case  there  was  no  rationalist 
idealism,  no  set  of  abstract  principles,  the  universality  of 
which  extends  to  all  men,  but  there  was  a  profound 
feeling  for  the  nobleness  and  human  value  of  the  forms  of 
civilization  created  in  the  course  of  centuries  by  English 
genius.  All  those  who  had  been  nourished  with  the 
milk  of  English  liberty  were  to  grow  strong  and  prosper 
under  the  aegis  of  the  law  founded  by  a  liberated  England 
for  the  protection  of  all  her  citizens :  the  fact  that  they  had 
carried  their  young  strength  and  activity  across  the  seas 
ought  to  entail  no  loss  whatever. 

Of  little  importance  to  him  were  the  questions  of  self- 
esteem  and  self-interest — after  all  doubtful — which  the 
Government  advanced  in  the  name  of  the  sovereign  right 
of  the  nation  or  in  behalf  of  the  necessities  of  the  budget. 
For  Burke  there  was  no  sovereignty  outside  of  the  legal 
dispositions  established  by  the  nation's  collective  wis- 
dom and  conserved  by  tradition.  All  questions  of  interest 
were  contemptible  in  comparison  with  the  dignity  and 
happiness  of  a  people  living  within  the  limits  of  its  his- 
torical rights.  In  this  noble  doctrine,  the  observer 
discovers  the  English  citizen's  deep-rooted  feeling  of 
pride  in  and  his  warm  attachment  to  the  national  in- 
stitutions, that  is  to  say  to  the  English  ideal  destined  to 
become,  in  the  nineteenth  century,  the  active  principle  of  , 
the  nation  and  to  constitute  the  social  bond  of  the  different 
parts  of  the  Empire.  To  Edmund  Burke  is  due  the 
honour  of  having  expressed  this  doctrine  for  the  first 
time. 

Burke's  warning  was  not  heeded.  Events  proved, 
however,  how  much  he  was  in  the  right.  Indeed  it  was 
precisely  to  those  moral  forces  representing  the  moral 
heritage  of  the  English  conscience,  that  the  insurgents  of 
America  owed  their  military  success  against  the  Hano- 
15 


226  Imperialism  and  Empire 

verian  mercenaries  pitted  against  them.  The  loss  of 
America  was  so  much  the  more  cruel  for  the  mother 
country  because  in  the  choice  of  its  institutions  the  new 
Republic  proved  its  fidelity  to  its  origin  and  sought  politi- 
cal stability  in  the  application  of  the  very  principles  de- 
fended by  Burke.  The  lesson  was  severe.  When,  after  the 
Napoleonic  wars,  political  progress  resumed  its  course  in 
England,  the  recollection  of  the  American  insurrection 
led  the  Metropolis  to  adopt  a  policy  of  moderation  and 
liberalism  in  the  establishment  of  the  Constitution  of 
Canada. 

The  conquest  of  Canada  left  no  bitterness  in  the  hearts 
of  the  French  colonists,  because  it  spared  the  civil  popula- 
tion and  was  followed  by  a  broad  and  tolerant  administra- 
tive regime.  There  could  be  no  question,  in  1785,  of 
self-government;  indeed  the  problem  had  not  yet  been 
posed  even  for  New  England.  The  French  colonists, 
who  had  recently  been  accustomed  to  the  feudal  domi- 
nation of  the  old  French  regime,  did  not  desire  it.  The 
Governor  and  civil  servants  of  the  Crown  secured  the 
sympathies  of  their  new  subjects  by  respecting  their 
feelings,  their  customs,  and  habits  and  all  those  things 
which,  for  a  cultivated  people  with  lofty  aspirations, 
make  life  really  worth  living.  French  remained  the  official 
language  of  the  country,  and  Catholicism  the  state  religion ; 
the  schools  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  Jesuits  who  had 
possessed  them  before  the  conquest.  Furthermore,  the 
English  emigrants  settled  mostly  in  the  unoccupied 
region  of  Lake  Ontario  and  along  the  upper  course  of  the 
Saint  Lawrence,  leaving  the  rural  districts  of  Lower 
Canada  in  possession  of  the  French.  Fifteen  years 
after  the  conquest,  the  inhabitants  were  closely  enough 
attached  to  their  new  country  to  refuse  to  join  the  in- 
surgents of  New  England :  it  was  owing  to  their  loyalty 


Imperialism  and  Empire  227 

that  England  was  able  to  conserve  her  magnificent  colony 
of  North  America. 

Meanwhile,  in  Canada  as  in  Europe,  the  progress  of 
political  ideas  was  following  its  course.  If,  it  is  true, 
the  echo  of  the  French  Revolution  was  not  particularly 
apparent,  the  same  cannot  be  said  of  the  English  demo- 
cratic reform  of  1832.  The  movement  of  political  in- 
dividualism which  emancipated  the  middle  class  at 
home,  created  a  desire  for  self-government  in  the  colony. 
Certain  local  difficulties  rendered  it  more  and  more 
pressing.  Canada  was  divided  into  two  provinces :  Upper 
Canada  inhabited  by  the  English  and  Lower  Canada 
settled  almost  exclusively  by  the  French  in  the  rural 
districts  and  by  a  mixed  population  in  the  towns.  Differ- 
ences arose  between  the  two  provinces  and  between  the 
English  and  French  elements  in  the  towns  of  Quebec 
and  Montreal.  The  Metropolis,  desirous  of  making  con- 
cessions, granted  each  province  an  elective  Assembly, 
but  placed  the  executive  power  in  the  hands  of  a  corps 
of  functionaries  nominated  by  the  Crown.  These  powers, 
of  different  origin  and  often  opposed  in  spirit,  were  found 
to  be  in  conflict  concerning  certain  questions  of  vital 
importance.  Riots,  headed  by  the  French  Canadian, 
Papineau,  broke  out  in  Lower  Canada.  Instead  of  using 
these  troubles  as  a  pretext  for  re-establishing  direct  ad- 
ministration in  the  colony,  the  English  Government, 
more  and  more  inclined  towards  a  policy  of  colonial  liberal- 
ism, dispatched  a  High  Commissioner  to  Canada — a 
broadminded  man  of  tried  moral  value,  Lord  Durham, 
who  had  played  an  eminent  r61e  in  the  great  Whig  cabinet 
of  1832.  The  task  was  an  arduous  one.  It  was  necessary 
to  establish  order  by  energetic  means  and  upon  this 
basis  of  dictatorial  authority  to  construct  an  edifice  of 
liberty,  to  reduce  laxity  and  revolt,  and  yet  to  wiri'the 
sympathy  of  the  colony.  Lord  Durham  left  England 


228  Imperialism  and  Empire 

in  1838.  The  conflict  was  so  bitter,  that  he  had  to  aban- 
don it  six  months  later,  being  held  in  check  in  Canada  and 
hampered  in  the  House  of  Commons  by  imprudent  min- 
isters. The  High  Commissioner's  career  was  ruined  as 
a  consequence;  but  representative  government  was  es- 
tablished in  Canada.  In  1840,  the  Constitution  which 
governs  the  Dominion  today  was  proclaimed.  It  became 
the  model  of  the  political  regime  applied  afterwards  to  the 
sparsely  settled  colonies  of  Australia  and  New  Zealand 
and,  later,  to  the  Federation  of  South  Africa. 

These  countries  are  governed  by  a  House  elected  by 
universal  suffrage  and  by  a  cabinet  ministry  responsible 
before  the  House.  England  is  represented  by  a  Governor 
who  occupies  a  position  somewhat  similar  to  that  of  the 
King  in,  the  British  Constitution,  that  is  to  say,  who 
can  intervene  as  an  independent  arbitrator  between  the 
parties,  but  can  make  no  decision  against  the  will  of  the 
people  expressed  by  its  representatives.  Like  the  sover- 
eign who  delegates  his  powers  to  him,  he  symbolizes  the 
national  idea.  By  the  dignity  which  surrounds  him,  by 
the  prestige  of  his  character  and  reputation,  by  what 
he  represents  of  English  greatness,  of  English  tradition 
and  historical  memories,  he  adds  solemnity  to  the  ties 
which  attach  the  colonies  to  the  mother  country. 

The  colonies  themselves  decide  everything  which 
concerns  the  internal  legislation,  the  revenues  and  ex- 
penditures of  the  budget,  the  commercial  system  and  the 
social  reforms.  Going  still  farther,  New  Zealand  and 
Australia  recently  have  tried  the  experiment — noteworthy 
in  the  history  of  the  world — of  intrusting  their  govern- 
ment, for  a  time,  to  a  socialist  cabinet  of  workingmen's 
representatives.  Similarly,  Canada,  considering  it  to  be  to 
her  interest  to  protect  herself  by  a  customs  tariff,  voted 
heavy  duties  on  foreign  importations  without  excepting 
English  products.  No  sovereign  can  abdicate  more  radi- 


Imperialism  and  Empire  229 

cally  than  England  has  done  the  former  colonial  concep- 
tion which  treated  the  over-seas  countries  as  possessions 
to  be  exploited.  It  is  impossible  to  be  more  deeply 
concerned  for  justice  and  more  scrupulously  respectful 
of  liberty.  Owing  to  that  fact  the  British  Empire  takes 
its  place  in  the  front  rank  among  the  great  instruments  of 
civilization. 

The  Irish  problem  should  hold  our  attention  just  as 
much  as  the  colonial  problem,  and  for  the  same  reasons, 
since  it,  too,  poses  the  question  of  liberty  within  unity  and 
since  it  has  been  similarly  solved  by  the  triumph  of  right. 
The  liberation  of  Ireland  was  more  laborious — and  more 
tragic — than  that  of  any  of  the  colonies.  In  the  long 
run,  however,  we  see  the  same  moral  forces,  which 
developed  in  England  in  the  course  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  triumph  over  historical  fatalities,  old-time  ha- 
treds, and  complexity  of  interests.  The  acts  of  justice 
which  Parliament  has  accomplished  within  the  last 
thirty  years,  in  behalf  of  the  sister  island  so  long  oppressed, 
is  proof  that  the  English  mind  is  definitely  won  to  the 
point  of  view  first  expressed  in  France,  in  1792,  by  a 
member  of  the  Convention:  "Gentlemen,  we  are  dis- 
cussing a  novel  problem  in  Europe,  this  problem  treats 
of  the  happiness  of  nations."  The  emancipation  of  the 
colonies,  and  the  liberation  of  Ireland,  are  the  stages 
which  have  led  England  to  consider,  as  we  do,  that  the 
annihilation  of  Servia  and  the  enslavement  of  Belgium 
would  have  marked  a  halt  in  the  idea  of  justice  and  a 
retrogression  towards  barbarism. 

Through  centuries,  the  question  of  Ireland  has  borne  the 
weight  of  the  terrible  complications  created,  at  the  origin, 
by  the  antipathy  of  two  races,  in  an  epoch  when  to  talk 
a  different  language,  to  profess  a  different  religion,  to 
practise  different  customs,  were  crimes  in  the  eyes  of 


230  Imperialism  and  Empire 

strong  and  conquering  nations.  Until  the  end  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  the  policy  of  the  Kings  of  England 
(which  Cromwell  continued  with  greater  ferocity)  con- 
sisted in  breaking  the  resistance  of  the  Irish  by  war, 
massacre,  and  expropriation.  We  can  get  an  idea  of  the 
martyrdom  of  this  unfortunate  country  by  comparing  it 
in  time  of  war,  with  the  Teutonic  invasion  of  Belgium 
and  Northern  France  today,  and  in  time  of  peace  with 
German  administration  in  Alsace,  in  Poland,  and  in  the 
Danish  Duchies.  There  is  this  difference:  the  things 
we  are  talking  about  took  place  at  a  time  when  conquerors 
were  without  pity  for  the  conquered;  that  is  the  excuse 
of  the  English  in  the  days  of  the  Tudors  and  of  Cromwell. 
But  for  the  atrocities  of  which  the  Belgians,  the  Servians, 
the  Poles,  and  our  own  unhappy  compatriots  are  the  vic- 
tims in  the  twentieth  century,  through  the  agency  of  a 
nation  which  announces  its  pretensions  to  culture,  there  is 
no  excuse.  Such  acts  place  the  German  people  beyond 
the  pale  of  civilization. 

Ireland  survived,  despite  bad  treatment  and  massacre; 
and  never  ceased  to  lay  claim  to  the  distinctive  traits 
of  her  nationality.  English  nobles  became  landlords  in 
Ireland;  English  colonists  settled  there,  built  towns  and 
formed  an  industrial  and  commercial  middle  class.  But 
they  only  prospered  in  the  north-east  province  of  Ulster 
which  they  made  into  what  is  now  called  ' '  the  Protestant 
garrison."  In  the  eighteenth  century  English  proceedings 
became  milder;  but  a  war  of  tariff  duties  and  prohibi- 
tive laws  began,  and  this  interfered  with  the  economic, 
intellectual,  and  social  development  of  Ireland.  The 
effect  of  this  latent  persecution  was  to  inspire  the  Irish 
with  a  fierce  attachment  for  the  national  idea,  which 
they  confounded  with  the  religious  idea,  and  to  drive  them 
into  a  state  of  veritable  fanaticism.  The  aspirations 
towards  independence  which  could  not  find  expression  in 


Imperialism  and  Empire  231 

the  legal  and  pacific  struggle  for  political  emancipa- 
tion took  the  violent  form  of  rioting  and  sometimes  of 
a  systematic  campaign  of  murder.  More  than  once, 
famine  exasperated  the  anger  of  the  people;  often  enough 
an  English  nobleman,  sometimes  the  most  innocent,  fell 
at  the  edge  of  a  wood,  shot  down  by  one  of  those  san- 
guinary enthusiasts  who  adopted  the  name  of  "Fenians." 
The  emotion  caused  in  1882  by  the  murder  of  Lord 
Cavendish  in  Phcenix  Park,  Dublin,  is  still  remembered. 
Terrible  measures  of  repression  replied  to  these  attacks; 
hatred  became  more  acute,  and  the  situation  instead  of 
brightening  grew  more  sombre. 

Nevertheless  the  spirit  of  justice  of  English  liberalism 
finally  triumphed  over  the  perilous  complexity  of  passions 
and  facts  in  which  race-hatreds,  religious  prejudices, 
and  economic  and  social  problems  were  inextricably  en- 
tangled. The  same  movement  which  caused  a  rapid 
progression  of  social  reform  around  1875,  also  paved  the 
way  for  the  emancipation  of  Ireland.  This  liberating 
legislation  was  an  application  of  that  moral  idealism 
which  tends  more  and  more  to  exercise  its  empire  in 
human  concerns ;  that  idealism  which  England  and  France 
are  defending  today  against  a  blinded  and  brutalized 
Germany.  The  man  whose  generous  intervention  we 
have  noticed  in  the  problems  raised  by  the  question  of 
nationalities — Gladstone — was  also  the  man  who  engaged 
his  party  in  the  perilous  defence  of  Ireland.  Thanks  to 
Gladstone,  Home  Rule  has  been  one  of  the  essential  articles 
of  the  Liberal  programme  since  the  eighties.  Death  sur- 
prised him  before  he  had  had  time — a  necessary  element 
for  the  success  of  so  great  a  reform — to  mature  his 
plans.  But  the  heirs  of  his  policy,  the  Liberals  of  the 
Asquith  ministry  were  on  the  point  of  bringing  it  to 
a  successful  issue,  despite  much  dangerous  resistance,  when 
the  war  broke  out  suddenly  and  interrupted  their  efforts. 


232  Imperialism  and  Empire 

The  Irish  economic  reform  is  "henceforth  an  accomplished 
fact.  For  several  years  certain  agrarian  laws  have  been 
in  application.  The  effect  of  these  is  to  bring  about  the 
transfer  of  land  from  the  great  English  landlords  to  the 
farmers  by  the  application  of  maximum  sale  prices  es- 
tablished by  decree  and  with  the  aid  of  capital  advanced 
on  mortgage  by  the  State.  The  time  has  gone  by  when 
the  peasant  was  wont  to  see  himself  crushed  under  an 
enormous  farm  rent,  stripped  of  the  fruit  of  his  own  im- 
provements on  the  leased  land,  brutally  ejected  from  his 
thatched  cottage  through  the  effect  of  the  pitiless  laws 
of  eviction.  The  Irishman  has  become  the  owner  of  his 
field ;  he  himself  administers,  by  virtue  of  new  municipal 
laws,  the  parish  and  the  district;  he  has  acquired  the 
right  to  vote,  and  in  the  near  future,  if  all  goes  well,  will 
elect  his  own  representative  to  the  Irish  Parliament. 
The  late  insurrection  of  the  Sinn  Feiners,  fomented  by 
German  intrigue  and  fostered  by  German  gold,  is  but 
the  scum  that  gathers  on  the  fringe  of  an  appeased  sea. 
Age-old  restlessness  could  hardly  have  been  entirely 
cleared  by  English  liberalism  and  justice  from  a  soil  so 
favourable  to  fanaticism  as  the  hearts  of  the  Irish  pro- 
fessional malcontents,  during  the  troubled  time  of  the 
World- War.  But  let  us  not  forget  that  300,000  Irishmen 
have  enrolled  as  volunteers  in  the  British  Army  and  are 
fighting  Britain's  fight  against  the  oppressors  of  nations. 

Ireland  will  be  free  to  administer  Irish  affairs  by  Irish- 
men, while  she  will  remain  intimately  connected  with 
England  by  federative  ties.  This  union  will  become 
the  model  of  the  Imperial  Federation  which  is  to  cement, 
on  the  morrow  of  the  war,  the  mother  country  to  the 
colonies  in  an  indissoluble  Empire.  It  will  be  essentially  a 
moral  union,  defined  by  a  few  general  stipulations  regulat- 
ing questions  of  national  defence  and  to  a  certain  extent 


Imperialism  and  Empire  233 

associating  the  colonies  with  the  discussions  of  foreign 
policy.  But  it  will  respect  the  independence  of  all  the 
parts  of  the  Empire  according  to  the  principles  established 
in  the  last  three-quarters  of  a  century. 

Some  years  ago,  a  project  of  more  intimate  union 
was  broached  by  a  party  which  adopted,  for  this  reason, 
the  name  of  Unionist.  Its  leader  was  Mr.  Chamberlain. 
The  policy  of  this  party  was  determined,  as  English 
decisions  are  often  and  legitimately  determined,  both 
by  sentiment  and  interest.  The  Unionists  strongly 
appreciated  the  beauty  and  nobleness  of  the  British 
Empire  which  would  enjoy,  they  thought,  an  incom- 
parable prestige  if  it  were  cemented  into  an  homogenous 
whole;  and  not  less  vividly  they  depicted  what  its  eco- 
nomic force  would  be,  if  it  were  possible  to  co-ordinate 
an  imperial  system  of  production  and  exchange. 

In  presence  of  German  competition,  a  certain  number 
of  English  manufacturers  and  merchants  were  beginning 
to  lose  confidence  in  Free  Trade  which  had  been  for  so 
long  the  supreme  article  of  faith  of  English  trade.  The 
colonies  had  not  adopted  Free  Trade,  because  young 
countries  need  to  protect  their  infant  industries,  and 
because  the  custom  duties  are  one  of  the  indispensable 
sources  of  revenue  for  a  budget  still  insufficiently  nour- 
ished by  direct  taxation.  England  perceived  that  she 
was  hindered  in  her  business  transactions  by  the  custom 
barriers  of  her  own  colonies.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
colonies  saw  themselves  embarrassed  in  their  trade 
relations  with  the  Metropolis  owing  to  the  system  of 
absolute  liberty  of  commerce,  which  forced  them  to  com- 
pete with  countries  capable  of  more  abundant  or  better 
organized  production.  Was  it  not  possible  for  England 
and  the  colonies  to  assure  themselves  reciprocal  advan- 
tages by  means  of  reciprocal  concessions?  Let  the  over- 
sea states  agree  to  tariff  reductions  in  favour  of  English 


234  Imperialism  and  Empire 

imports;  let  the  mother  country  apply  a  schedule  of 
custom  duties  to  foreign  imports  competing  with  colonial 
imports:  both  parties  to  the  contract  would  profit  by  the 
transaction.  The  agreement  thus  reached  would  make  a 
vast  Zollverein  of  the  Empire,  upon  a  basis  of  preferential 
tariffs  which  would  only  slightly  modify  existing  habits, 
and  of  which  the  consequences  would  be  incalculable. 
The  immense  community  of  300,000,000  people  under- 
standing the  English  tongue,  recognizing  English  law, 
and  commending  themselves  to  the  English  ideal,  would 
find  a  new  element  of  cohesion  in  the  mutual  adaptation 
of  material  interests.  All  the  English  throughout  the 
world  would  form  a  compact  block  against  their  rivals 
in  the  pacific  struggle  for  prosperity,  and  would  be  able 
in  case  of  need,  should  any  peril  menace  the  Empire,  to 
consider  the  means  of  facing  together  the  dangers  of  war. 
The  project,  however,  involved  serious  difficulties. 
The  majority  of  English  people  were  not  inclined  to 
abandon  the  advantages  of  Free  Trade :  a  vigorous  protest 
rose  from  the  ranks  of  the  worker  against  "dear  bread"; 
numerous  manufacturers  declared  that  they  could  not 
abandon  the  advantage  of  buying  their  raw  material  at 
an  easy  rate.  Moreover  the  colonies  live  under  geo- 
graphic, climatic,  and  economic  conditions  too  different 
from  those  of  the  metropolis,  and  in  fact,  have  acquired 
a  mentality  too  distinctly  individual — American,  African, 
or  Australasian — to  be  able  to  accept  the  common  idea  of 
legislation,  of  administration,  and  of  the  financial  and 
even  military  policy  which  the  Union  would  imply.  The 
problem  of  the  defence  of  the  Empire  was  one  of  its 
principal  stumbling-blocks.  Before  Germany,  in  her 
world-policy,  had  so  completely  unmasked  her  designs 
on  English  possessions,  the  colonies  did  not  feel  themselves 
in  peril.  They  were  not  greatly  concerned  about  carrying 
their  share  of  the  enormous  burden  of  armaments.  If 


Imperialism  and  Empire  235 

some  of  them  felt  themselves  under  the  menace  of  a  dan- 
ger, it  was  not  the  particular  danger  which  was  hovering 
over  the  mother  country:  for  instance,  Australia  believed 
she  had  more  to  fear  from  Japan  than  from  Germany. 
For  all  these  reasons  the  restricted  material  and  legal 
union  of  which  Mr.  Chamberlain  dreamed,  was  deemed 
impossible.  The  check  of  the  federative  policy  of  the 
Unionists  was  one  of  the  causes  of  their  unpopularity 
and  of  the  return  of  the  Liberal  party  to  power  in  1906 

The  Liberals,  although  true  to  Free  Trade  and  true  also 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  independence  of  the  Dominions, 
although,  in  other  words  attached  to  the  commercial 
and  colonial  individualism  which  constitutes  the  tradi- 
tional policy  of  England,  are  not,  however,  hostile  to  im- 
perialism. They  wish  to  combine  in  equitable  proportions 
independence  and  union  in  imperial  questions,  just  as  they 
have  discovered  a  just  formula  of  alliance  between  in- 
dividual liberty  and  social  organization  in  questions  of 
home  policy.  Harshness  towards  the  colonies  would 
have  been  dangerous ;  the  example  of  America  in  the  eigh- 
teenth century  was  valuable  as  a  reminder  that  England 
can  expect  that  filial  attachment  which  in  case  of  danger 
or  attack  means  to  her  a  powerful  increase  of  force,  only 
from  the  goodwill  and  affection  of  the  colonies.  (As  a 
matter  of  fact  neither  goodwill  nor  affection  were  refused 
her,  in  the  hour  of  trial.  This  had  just  been  proved  in  the 
critical  circumstances  of  the  Transvaal  War,  when  the 
colonies  had  been  assiduous  rivals  in  the  voluntary  send- 
ing of  combatants  and  war  material  to  England,  heavily 
engaged  in  the  struggle.)  The  Liberals  themselves  (the 
"radical"  fraction  of  the  party  at  least)  showed  a  ten- 
dency to  ignore  the  German  peril.  In  their  love  for  peace, 
they  supposed  in  good  faith  that  their  cousins  beyond 
the  Rhine  really  entertained  the  pacific  sentiments  which 


236  Imperialism  and  Empire 

they  professed  in  their  speeches.  Nevertheless  this 
peril  became  startlingly  evident  at  certain  moments, 
for  instance,  following  a  check  of  the  attempts  made  to 
reach  an  understanding,  or  following  a  sudden  increase  in 
the  German  naval  programme.  Here  was  a  warning 
that  England  might  find  it  profitable  to  realize  a  stronger 
cohesion  of  the  Empire. 

The  Liberals,  then,  were  seeking  to  bring  about  the 
union — or  more  precisely  the  free  union,  the  English 
union — of  the  colonies  and  the  Metropolis.  They  main- 
tained the  political  instrument,  created  by  their  prede- 
cessors, of  the  "Intercolonial  Conference,"  a  periodic 
assembly  in  which  the  delegates  of  the  Dominions  met 
in  London  with  the  Crown  ministers  in  order  to  discuss 
semi-officially  questions  of  common  interest.  In  the 
course  of  these  meetings  they  were  careful,  both  in  their 
propositions  and  in  their  conversations,  to  treat  the 
colonial  ministers  on  a  footing  of  equality,  not  to  urge 
them  to  accept  such  or  such  a  solution  against  their 
preference,  to  take  into  account  the  particular  problems 
arising  in  the  colonies,  the  colonies'  desires,  and  even 
their  local  patriotism  and  point  of  honour.  When  New 
Zealand,  Australia,  and  South  Africa  generously  offered 
to  contribute  to  the  increase  of  the  British  Navy  by  the 
construction  of  battle-ships,  they  accepted  this  important 
contribution  with  gratitude.  When,  on  the  other  hand, 
Canada  made  known  her  wish  to  substitute  her  own 
militia  for  the  English  garrisons,  and  to  construct  ships 
which  were  to  remain  in  Canadian  waters  in  time  of  peace, 
they  acquiesced.  This  attitude  directly  induced  Canada 
to  give  proof  of  increased  goodwill  by  preparing  for  the 
co-operation,  in  case  of  need,  of  her  militiamen  with  the 
British  Army,  through  the  nomination  of  a  Canadian 
General  Staff  resident  in  London  and  constantly  in  touch 
with  the  English  General  Staff. 


Imperialism  and  Empire  237 

Thanks  to  this  prudent  dealing  and  liberal  spirit,  the 
Union  Imperialism,  which  had  made  no  progress  as  long 
as  the  question  had  been  placed  on  an  administrative  and 
legislative  basis,  gained  strength  when  placed  on  the  ground 
of  common  memories,  of  identical  political  and  moral 
aspirations,  and  of  unanimity  of  feeling  and  affection. 

"  The  indestructible  basis  of  the  Empire  is  sentiment — the 
intangible  but  very  vital  compound  of  patriotism  and  pride  in 
the  stock,  pride  in  England  and  in  English  history,  and  pas- 
sionate attachment  to  the  British  Crown — all  this  idealized, 
raised  to  the  highest  degree  of  fervour  and  genuineness,  made 
romantic,  if  you  like,  by  distance  and  the  glamour  of  a  long- 
drawn  perspective.  There  is  poetry  in  it;  there  is  almost  a 
sort  of  religion  in  it."1 

The  Empire  is  not  composed  solely  of  free  Dominions 
inhabited  by  the  British;  it  also  comprises  the  "Crown 
Colonies"  in  which  the  imperial  administration  is  exer- 
cised authoritatively  over  subdued  peoples.  Among 
these  possessions,  India  is  the  most  important  with  its 
231,000,000  inhabitants,  its  immense  stretches  of  territory, 
its  memories  of  an  ancient  and  brilliant  civilization,  its 
distinct  customs,  its  potentates,  and  its  castes.  Until  a 
few  years  ago,  England's  task  had  consisted  in  establishing 
order  in  this  vast  country  without  brutality  and  yet  with- 
out weakness,  without  clashing  too  violently  with  an- 
ciently established  habits  and  yet  without  sacrificing  the 
necessities  of  humanity  and  of  civilization.  She  had 
succeeded  in  this  object  thanks  to  a  chosen  corps  of 
functionaries,  the  famous  India  Civil  Service,  who  em- 
ployed their  technical  competency  and  their  high-minded- 
ness  as  gentlemen  in  the  service  of  the  provinces.  During 
the  last  ten  years,  however,  the  situation  has  become 
considerably  complicated.  The  successful  efforts  made 

1  Sydney  Brooks,  Fortnightly  Review,  1913. 


238  Imperialism  and  Empire 

by  England  to  uplift  the  Hindoos  and  initiate  the  upper 
classes  at  least  into  European  civilization,  have  produced 
their  fruits.  The  Hindoo  schools  and  Universities  have 
formed  a  middle  class  not  only  cultivated  but  ambitious, 
which  has  become  enamoured  of  the  vision  of  a  return 
to  the  great  epoch  of  the  Kingdom  of  Magadha.  In- 
dustrial establishments  have  increased  manifold,  bringing 
in  their  train  more  comfort,  a  more  rapid  penetration 
of  modern  ideas,  and  a  diffusion  of  the  spirit  of  agitation 
in  the  underlying  social  strata.  Finally  the  victory  of 
Japan  over  Russia  has  caused  the  appearance  throughout 
Asia  of  a  restless  thrill  of  hope. 

From  1906  on  there  appeared  in  India  a  nationalist 
movement  which  drew  attention  to  certain  claims  sug- 
gested precisely  by  the  very  principles  of  English  liberty 
which  the  Hindoos  had  learned  in  contact  with  their 
masters.  The  leaders  of  the  movement  claimed  "three 
rights  which  belong  to  every  English  citizen":  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  public  services  entrusted  to  the  in- 
habitants of  India;  the  voting  of  taxes  by  representatives 
of  the  people;  and  the  exclusive  use  of  the  Indian  budget 
for  the  needs  of  the  country.  The  energetic  firmness  of 
the  people's  spokesmen,  and,  soon  after,  the  revolutionary 
acts  into  which  certain  fanatics  translated  the  political 
idealism  of  the  leaders,  forced  public  opinion  and  the 
English  Government  to  pay  attention  to  the  movement. 
The  controversies  were  animated,  since  it  was  a  question 
of  nothing  less  than  deciding  whether  the  paternal  despot- 
ism, which  had  characterized  the  English  domination  in 
India  for  more  than  two  centuries,  should  give  place  to 
liberal  institutions  in  a  country  where  the  division  of 
races,  castes,  and  religions,  the  primitive  state  of  customs 
among  the  greater  number,  and  lastly,  the  delicate  rela- 
tions between  conquerors  and  conquered,'  rendered  all 
questions  extremely  complex  and  arduous. 


Imperialism  and  Empire  239 

England's  instinct  and  tradition  of  liberalism  led  her  to 
choose  the  new  and  perilous  route  of  concessions  to  the 
Hindoo  people.  The  Secretaryship  of  State  for  India, 
in  the  cabinet,  was  given  to  the  venerable  veteran  of  the 
Liberal  party  Mr.  (since  Lord)  John  Morley,  and  a  series 
of  reforms  was  inaugurated.  The  Imperial  Legislative 
Council  at  Calcutta  was  reorganized,  being  henceforth 
composed  of  representatives  of  all  the  provinces  and  of 
all  classes  of  the  population  and  virtually  transformed 
into  a  sort  of  small  Parliament.  The  complaints  of  the 
natives  were  able  to  find  expression.  A  new  Governor, 
the  ex-cabinet  minister,  Charles  Hardinge,  set  himself 
fearlessly  to  study  the  reforms  immediately  possible 
and  those  which  could  be  prepared  for  the  future.  The 
serious  problem  of  rivalry  between  the  Mahometans  and 
the  Hindoos  was  solved,  at  least  provisionally.  Finally 
a  definite  measure  was  adopted  at  the  time  when  King 
George  came  in  person  in  1911  to  have  himself  crowned 
in  the  ancient  capital  of  Delhi :  during  the  ceremony  of  the 
Durban,  a  herald-at-arms  proclaimed  to  the  people  a 
veritable  charter  of  emancipation  which  granted  the 
notables  an  important  part  in  the  Government  and  gave 
satisfaction  on  numerous  points  to  the  self-esteem  of  the 
nation.  That  evening  an  immense  crowd  came  to  bow 
down  before  the  throne  where  the  King  had  given  audience. 
The  loyalty  of  the  nation  was  given  new  life;  India  was 
definitely  reconquered.  In  1914,  she  remained  deaf  to 
the  instigations  to  revolt  prompted  by  Germany.  100,000 
Sepoys  are  now  fighting  valorously  for  England  on  the 
plains  of  France,  on  the  border  of  the  Suez  Canal,  and  in 
Mesopotamia. x 

1  Minor  facts  allow  us  to  judge  of  the  differences  between  the  English 
and  the  German  methods.  A  Rajah  who  was  serving  in  the  English 
contingent  in  China,  at  the  time  of  the  expedition  against  the  Boxers  was 
so  indignant  at  the  contempt  manifested  by  the  German  officers  towards 


240  Imperialism  and  Empire 

The  German  Empire  possesses  certain  colonies.  One 
may  judge  of  the  success  with  which  it  governs  its  African 
subjects  by  the  fact  that  the  natives  of  the  French  terri- 
tories of  the  Congo,  ceded  to  Germany  by  the  terms  of  the 
treaty  of  1911,  deserted  their  homes  in  mass  to  escape  the 
domination  of  the  Germans  whose  unpleasant  reputation 
was  only  too  well  known  to  them  through  their  kinsmen 
of  the  Cameroon.  As  for  the  European  populations 
annexed  by  Germany  .  .  .  their  long  martyrdom  is  a 
matter  of  common  knowledge.  In  Poland,  in  order 
to  overcome  the  country's  obstinacy  in  conserving  its 
language,  school  children  were  subjected  to  the  whipping- 
system:  Kultur  by  flogging,  such  was  the  civilizing 
method  invented  by  the  nation  which  proclaims  itself  pre- 
destined through  the  will  of  its  "Old  God"  to  govern  the 
world.  Then,  again,  it  used  the  policy  of  expropriation. 
The  rich  plains  of  Poland  were  to  pass  into  the  hands 
of  German  colonists  who,  little  by  little,  would  drive  out 
the  first  occupants,  finally  reduced  by  poverty  to  de- 
pendence or  emigration.  But  thanks  to  the  patriotic  de- 
votion, to  the  invincible  tenacity,  and  also  to  the  subtlety 
of  the  Poles,  the  law  of  expropriation  remained  without 
effect.  Despite  the  considerable  sums  placed  by  the 
State  at  the  disposal  of  the  German  farmers,  the  children 
of  the  soil  held  fast  to  their  birthright.  Since  1864  the 


him  that  in  1914  he  asked,  as  a  favour,  to  serve  with  all  his  men  against 
the  Germans  in  order  to  avenge  their  treatment.  An  Italian  journalist 
who  was  visiting  the  English  lines  in  France,  reports  a  conversation  which 
he  had  with  a  Hindoo  chief.  "Are  you  content  to  have  come  here,  in  a 
country  which  is  not  yours,  to  serve  the  interests  of  a  nation  which  domi- 
nates your  people?"  The  Hindoo  replied  with  high  spirit:  "India  is  not 
dominated;  she  is  a  part,  and  not  the  least  part  of  a  great  Empire.  .  .  . 
If  the  Empire  were  threatened  in  India,  English  soldiers  would  be  there 
to  defend  us.  It  is  now  threatened  in  Europe;  we  have  come  to  fight  for 
it."  He  added  with  pride:  "We  are  English."  (//  Secolo,  19  Oct., 
1914.  Cited  by  the  Times.) 


Imperialism  and  Empire  241 

Danes  of  Schleswig  have  maintained  an  obstinate  struggle 
to  conserve  their  affiliations  with  the  old  Scandinavian 
mother  country.  Since  1870,  the  inhabitants  of  Alsace 
and  Lorraine  have  exposed  themselves  to  cruel  treatment 
in  order  to  maintain  in  their  midst  the  vitality  of  the 
French  language  and  civilization  until  the  day  of  libera- 
tion. All  sorts  of  means  have  been  employed  to  se- 
duce them :  violence,  hypocritical  mildness,  intimidations 
through  threats,  astonishment  through  the  use  of  the 
"Kolossal, "  division  through  hatred,  and  corruption 
through  favour.  After  the  concession  of  a  false  autonomy 
the  German  authorities  have  returned  to  repression  by 
means  of  the  state  of  siege  as  was  instanced  by  the  odious 
military  tyranny  meted  out  to  the  town  of  Zabern  for 
the  cry  of  a  child  in  the  street. 

Wherever  the  Germans  establish  themselves  they  make 
people  forget  the  happy  effects  of  their  genius  for  organiza- 
tion, of  their  methodic  administration,  of  their  patience 
and  of  their  foresight  in  the  matter  of  economic  devel- 
opment, because  of  their  brutality  and  their  contempt 
for  psychological  values.  Their  contribution  to  progress 
(the  merit  of  which  would  not  be  disputed,  if  it  were 
not  accompanied  with  insolence,  pride  and,  unfortunately, 
barbarism)  pertains  only  to  the  mechanical  order.  It  has 
its  value;  it  will  receive  due  credit  when  it  no  longer 
threatens  to  lead  the  cultured  society  of  European  nations 
back  to  the  age  of  the  cave-men.  In  order  the  better  to 
establish  its  will-to-power,  this  nation  has  thrown  away 
all  dignity  and  nobleness  and  all  human  kindliness.  And 
that  is  why,  if  it  is  legitimate  to  allow  it  to  exercise  what 
Carlyle  called  "beaverish  activity,"  it  is  contrary  to  the 
universal  law  of  the  supremacy  of  the  spirit  to  allow  it  to 
exercise  a  r61e  of  direction  and  command.  These  people 
were  determined  to  command,  through  mechanism  and 
force;  but  mechanism  and  force,  employed  in  the  service 

16 


242  Imperialism  and  Empire 

of  humanity  and  of  right  have  turned  against  them. 
Nor  did  they  omit  the  claim  to  dominance  in  the  distant 
countries  won  over  to  civilization  by  the  humanizing 
genius  of  England  and  France.  Their  pre-war  literature 
cynically  proclaimed,  in  the  name  of  Kultur,  the  right 
of  the  Germans  to  drive  the  impotent  English  and  French 
out  of  their  colonies.  The  same  Bernhardi  who  incul- 
cated cruelty  and  treaty-violation,  announced  that  the 
British  Empire,  hopelessly  decadent,  would  at  the  first 
shock  disintegrate  under  the  action  of  an  irresistible 
"centrifugal force."  ... 

On  this  point,  as  on  so  many  others,  German  arrogance 
was  built  on  a  foundation  of  stupidity.  Just  as  soon  as 
war  was  declared,  the  Irish  (with  the  exception  of  a  handful 
of  mad  men)  showed  their  loyalty;  the 'colonies,  who  had 
been  unwilling  to  bind  themselves,  ahead  of  time,  by  a 
formal  treaty,  made  an  admirable  effort  to  help  the 
Metropolis  with  all  the  forces  and  all  the  means  in  their 
power;  the  British  possessions,  in  which  Germany  tried  to 
foment  trouble,  drew  close  around  their  protectress  through 
attachment  to  British  rule  and  through  hatred  of  the 
German  yoke.  The  list  of  troops,  of  provisions,  of  sums 
of  money  sent  to  the  Government  in  London  or  placed  at 
its  service  by  the  different  parts  of  the  Empire,  forms  a 
folio  of  forty  pages.  I  cannot  cite  all  the  articles  of  this 
document — a  veritable  Golden  Book  of  the  Empire,  which 
will  become  later  the  great  souvenir,  more  useful  than  all 
legislative  acts,  upon  which  the  solidity  of  the  union  will 
repose.  It  is  enough  to  recollect  that  India  sent  100,000 
auxiliaries;  that  Australian  and  New  Zealand  soldiers 
defended  the  Suez  Canal,  conducted  themselves  like 
heroes  on  the  Gallipoli  peninsula  and  are  now  fighting 
in  France ;  that  the  Australian  fleet  captured  the  German 
colonies  of  the  Pacific  and  destroyed  the  cruiser  Emden, 


Imperialism  and  Empire  243 

that  every  month  Australia  forwards  several  millions 
sterling  for  Belgium,  invaded  and  pressed  by  hunger; 
that  200,000  Canadians  including  40,000  French- Canadi- 
ans have  arrived  or  are  about  to  arrive  in  the  trenches;  that 
the  Boers  and  the  English  of  South  Africa  have  beaten  a 
force  of  rebels  financed  by  Germany,  have  conquered 
German  West  Africa  and  will  help  to  complete  the  conquest 
of  German  East  Africa.  The  wheat  and  the  horses  of 
Canada,  the  frozen  meat  of  Australia,  the  rice  and  wheat 
of  India,  arrive  in  great  quantities  and  are  often  offered 
gratuitously  by  the  colonial  governments.  Finally  the 
private  generosity  of  the  many  millions. of  British  settlers 
the  world  over  has  permitted  the  forwarding  to  the  centre 
of  operations  of  ambulances,  of  dressing  material  and 
pharmaceutical  products,  and  of  considerable  gifts  of 
money.  Belgium,  so  cruelly  tried,  has  been  a  particular 
object  of  their  solicitude,  and  France  has  not  been 
forgotten. 

What  precedes  is  merely  an  outline  of  the  sacrifices 
voluntarily  and  enthusiastically  made  by  the  colonies  on 
behalf  of  the  mother  country  which  is  esteemed  and 
respected  as  the  guardian  of  the  traditions  of  liberty, 
justice,  and  human  nobleness  constituting  the  English 
ideal.  The  Empire  will  emerge  stronger  from  this  trial 
which  has  thrown  the  chivalry  of  England  and  the  treach- 
ery of  Germany  into  violent  contrast,  and  set  up  a  startling 
opposition  between  the  former's  law-abiding  spirit,  respect 
for  humanity,  generous  defence  of  the  weak,  and  the 
latter's  sanguinary  savagery,  contempt  for  the  laws  of 
war  and  civilization,  cynical  and  inhuman  aggression 
against  unprotected  peoples. 

The  Dominions  have  found  a  way  of  employing  their 
moral  force — a  force  of  youth,  of  daring  and'prompt  adap- 
tation to  circumstances — in  the  service  of  the  Metropo- 
lis. If  a  new  organization  of  the  Empire  is  to  prevail, 


244  Imperialism  and  Empire 

an  organization  destined  to  articulate  the  scattered  mem- 
bers of  this  vast  body  and  give  it  a  force  of  cohesion  and 
union  which  will  leave  the  way  open  to  splendid  achieve- 
ments, such  a  result  will  be  due  in  great  measure  to  the 
initiative  of  the  colonies.  The  Prime  Minister  of  Austra- 
lia, Mr.  Hughes,  who  came  to  England  in  the  early  part 
of  the  year  1916,  has  succeeded,  thanks  to  his  clear-sighted- 
ness, his  ardent  imperialistic  patriotism,  and  his  sincere 
eloquence,  in  creating  a  wave  of  opinion  the  effects  of 
which  will  survive  the  war.  The  colonies,  like  the 
Metropolis,  are  liberal  and  democratic.  Their  spirit 
and  their  ideal  are  violently  opposed  to  the  oppressive 
and  barbarous  methods  of  German  despotism.  If  the 
United  States,  finally  enlightened,  sees  fit  to  co-operate 
after  the  war  in  the  great  effort  made  by  England  and 
her  Empire  to  bring  about  the  triumph  of  individualism 
and  liberty,  then  the  Anglo-Saxon  world  and  France, 
firmly  united,  will  form  an  indestructible  rampart  against  a 
renewal  of  German  brutality  and  will  become  the  arbi- 
trators of  the  future  in  the  name  of  peace,  of  human 
sympathy,  of  respect  for  human  independence,  of  the 
observation  of  treaties,  of  the  sacredness  of  honour — in 
a  word,  of  all  that  constitutes  the  nobleness  of  life. 


CHAPTER  IX 

The  Modern  English  Spirit  as  Exemplified  in 
English  Customs 

THE    moral    causes    of    Anglo-German    antagonism 
and  of  Franco-British  friendship   centre  around 
two  essential  qualities  of  the  English  mind:  love 
of  freedom  and  respect  for  the  human  person. 

We  have  already  drawn  attention  to  the  presence  of 
these  qualities  in  England's  political  constitution,  in  her 
social  organization,  and  in  her  colonial  regime.  We  are 
now  to  try  and  render  them  apparent  from  another  point 
of  view,  with  their  original  value  and  deep  significance, 
by  tracing  them  to  their  source  in  English  manners  and 
customs.  The  subject  is  vast;  we  can  only  refer  to  its 
principal  aspects.  So  brief  a  study,  however,  will  not  be 
without  utility.  It  will  show  us  in  what  way  the  spirit 
of  independence  and  the  quality  of  lofty  aspiration  origi- 
nate in  the  social  milieu  and  develop  therein  through  the 
added  effect  of  education,  tradition,  and  opinion,  and  of  all 
the  thousand  and  one  influences  which  constitute  the 
creative  power  of  a  civilization. 

The  child  in  the  family  and  in  the  school  is  brought  up 
to  become  not  only  a  good  Englishman,  but  also,  in  the 
loftiest  sense  of  the  word,  a  man.  The  quality  which 
comprises  the  essence  of  a  man  and  which  the  English 
place  on  the  highest  level  is  the  quality  of  responsibility. 

245 


246  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

To  develop  responsibility,  that  is  to  discipline  the  will 
to  do  good  and  not  at  all  to  satisfy  a  master  or  to  serve 
the  interests  of  the  community — even  were  this  com- 
munity of  a  higher  order,  like  the  State — but  to  obey  the 
conscience,  such  is  the  ideal  which  in  all  classes  of  society 
and  in  all  walks  of  life,  English  education  aims  to  achieve. 
The  term  Good  in  such  education  means  dignity,  honesty, 
and  straight -forwardness,  which  the  general  consent  of 
men — in  countries  where  the  conscience  has  not  been 
perverted  by  some  collective  madness — considers  as  the 
essence  of  the  moral  person.  The  English  boy  learns 
over  and  over  again,  by  precept  and  example  and  by  the 
movement  of  the  social  organism  itself  of  which  he  forms 
an  integral  part,  to  curb  equivocal  suggestions  and  base 
desires,  to  respect  his  spiritual  being,  and  to  remain 
worthy  of  the  ideal  through  which  English  honour  finds 
itself  in  touch  with  what  is  best  in  humanity. 

Like  every  young  and  vigorous  being,  the  English  boy 
loves  to  fight;  but  the  battle  must  be  even-sided  and  must 
be  fought  according  to  the  rules  of  a  loyal  contest  or  of 
what  he  calls  "fair  play."  A  tradition  of  the  schools 
prescribes  that  a  dispute  or  some  contested  point  of 
honour  or  right  should  not  be  settled  on  the  spot  with  the 
feet  and  hands  in  a  furious  onset  which  anger  may  cause 
to  degenerate  into  a  brutal  performance.  The  two  ad- 
versaries, however  strong  their  resentment  may  be, 
control  themselves  from  a  feeling  of  dignity  and  of  self- 
possession  and  from  desire  to  dominate  their  passions. 
Were  they  to  fall  short  in  this  respect,  school  opinion 
which  is  expressed  in  the  school  spirit — an  unwritten  law 
more  powerful  than  codes — would  call  them  to  order  and, 
in  case  of  need,  would  impose  the  necessary  sanctions. 
Whenever  a  dispute  assumes  such  proportions  that  the 
decision  can  only  be  reached  by  a  show  of  force,  there 
is  an  appeal  to  single  combat  before  witnesses  according  to 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  247 

traditional  rules.  Kicking  is  prohibited;  a  blow  struck 
below  the  belt,  an  attack  made  when  the  opponent 
stumbles  or  has  lost  breath  would  call  for  the  indignant 
intervention  of  the  onlookers.  Regular  rounds  and 
regular  intervals,  timed  to  the  second,  characterize  the 
battle.  Its  consequences  may  very  well  be  unpleasant 
for  one  or  the  other  of  the  contestants  and  sometimes  for 
both.  But  even  when  blood  has  been  drawn,  when  the 
flesh  is  bruised  and  the  face  swollen  and  disfigured,  neither 
fighter  at  any  rate  can  be  accused  of  having  struck  a 
cowardly  blow.  Fair  play  does  not  exclude  manly  rough- 
ness, an  element  which  no  virile  civilization  can  afford  to 
neglect;  but  it  does  prohibit  violence  representing  merely 
a  savage  boiling  over  of  the  instincts  and  finding  cowardly 
outlet  against  feeble  or  helpless  opponents  without  the 
risk  which  ennobles  the  struggle  and  gives  it  a  moral 
character. 

Thus,  the  Rugby,  Eton,  or  Harrow  boy  does  not  shun 
a  fight  when  it  is  forced  upon  him — and  he  must  conduct 
himself  therein  courageously  and  nobly — but  he  does  not 
seek  it  in  a  spirit  of  vain-glory  or  premeditated  brutality, 
as  the  German  student  seeks  his  rapier  wounds  or  slashes. 
The  Mensur,  that  is  the  duel  of  the  Teutonic  Universities, 
is  at  the  same  time  an  initiation  into  the  aristocratic 
mysteries  of  the  Burschenschaft,  a  swashbuckler's  bra- 
vado and  a  legendary  exploit  of  rough  violence;  but  it 
does  not  necessarily  call  for  any  real  self-possession 
and  it  is  entirely  free  from  any  feeling  of  chivalry.  The 
slash  is  worn  like  a  coat  of  arms,  but  it  is  an  out- 
ward sign  which  often  corresponds  to  no  sort  of  spiritual 
nobleness. 

Moreover  it  is  not  the  single  combat  or  fist-fight  which 
really  attracts  the  Englishman — except  perhaps  as  a  spec- 
tacle in  the  ring.  Our  over-channel  neighbours  seek  the 


248  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

strong  emotions  of  the  hunter  or  the  warrior's  rugged 
virtues — now  reduced  to  noble  souvenirs — in  the  practice 
of  athletic  sports.  They  depend  upon  these  sports  for 
the  training  of  the  muscles  and  will-power  necessary 
to  thoroughly  develop  the  individual.  In  Prance  we  are 
beginning  to  understand  how  essential  for  the  physical 
and  moral  development  is  the  practice  of  great  organized 
games;  but  we  are  still  very  little  inclined  to  give  them 
the  importance  which  they  have  assumed  in  England  for 
a  century  or  more.  Great  Britain  is  the  only  country  in 
which  athletics  have  their  full  educational  value,  because 
they  really  represent  a  national  training  school.  People 
of  all  ages  and  all  classes  devote  themselves  to  some 
kind  of  sport.  Children  enjoy  reserved  quarters  on  the 
Common  or  parish  play-ground  to  practice  the  elements 
of  football  or  the  first  steps  of  cricket.  Elderly  men 
organize  their  own  matches  in  which  they  are  no  longer 
able  to  compete  with  younger  men.  The  adults  of  the 
country  form  club  teams  everywhere,  to  fit  themselves, 
in  their  moments  of  leisure,  according  to  preference  or 
aptness  or  according  to  the  season,  for  the  noble  practice 
of  the  national  games.  The  outskirts  of  the  towns  are 
intersected  with  a  net-work  of  meadows  of  close-cropped 
grass,  where  groups  of  young  men  in  white  flannel  or 
variegated  jerseys  disport  themselves.  Twice  a  week  the 
shops  and  factories  cease  work  in  the  afternoon,  and 
release  "all  hands."  Employees  and  workmen  are  soon 
transformed  into  nimble,  daring,  and  persevering  players. 
At  set  dates,  matches  permit  rival  teams  to  measure  their 
strength,  in  presence  of  thousands  of  on-lookers.  .  .  . 
The  boatrace  between  Oxford  and  Cambridge  is  an 
event  which  attracts  an  immense  crowd  to  Henley  from 
all  parts  of  the  United  Kingdom.  The  practice  of  sports 
thus  organized  and  generalized  and  finally  become  an 
institution  and  a  national  passion  undoubtedly  exercises 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  249 

a  formative  influence  on  the  character  of  the  race.  And 
in  fact  the  qualities  that  can  be  attributed  to  this  influ- 
ence are  many.  I  shall  mention  physical  endurance,  the 
spirit  of  discipline,  the  devotion  of  the  individual  to  the 
group,  the  sacrifice  of  personal  vanity  to  the  common 
interest,  initiative,  patience,  and  authority.  I  shall  par- 
ticularly insist  on  fairness  in  combat  and  generosity 
towards  the  opponent. 

In  the  more  sharply  contested  parts  of  a  big  match, 
it  would  be  impossible  to  obtain  the  victory  by  some  under- 
handed manoeuvre,  or  to  reduce  an  adversary  to  power- 
lessness  by  some  foul  stroke.  Public  opinion  would  be 
extremely  severe  with  those  who  should  thus  abase  a 
noble  struggle  of  combined  courage,  skill,  and  tactics  to  the 
level  of  a  vulgar  scramble  for  success.  Collective  senti- 
ment, the  auxiliary  and  support  of  individual  sentiment, 
creates  an  atmosphere  of  honesty  and  chivalry  in  con- 
nection with  athletic  sports  in  England.  Of  whatever 
strenuousness  the  opponents  may  give  proof  in  seeking 
victory,  which  means  notoriety  and  almost  glory,  yet 
they  are  really  sustained  in  the  contest  by  a  spirit  of 
noble  emulation.  Like  the  Frenchman,  the  Englishman 
places  honour  above  material  advantages,  with  this 
difference,  perhaps,  that  the  latter  who  possesses  a  sense 
of  the  value  of  social  discipline  seeks  to  do  better  with  a 
view  to  the  triumph  of  the  group,  while  the  former  usually 
outdoes  himself  from  a  feeling  of  pure  individual  excel- 
lence. But  in  both  cases  it  is  self-respect  and  love  of 
valour  which  give  a  value  to  athletics.  There  again, 
Herr  von  Bulow  would  be  surprised  at  the  importance 
given  to  "psychical  needs"  in  these  two  countries. 

I  know  of  no  better  example  of  magnanimity  between 
rivals  than  the  example  of  the  Oxford  rowing  men,  of 
which  I  was  a  witness  while  I  was  a  student  at  Harvard 
University.  The  Oxford  "Eight"  compete  periodically 


250  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

with  the  Harvard  "Eight,"  sometimes  on  the  Thames 
and  sometimes  on  the  River  Charles  at  Boston.  The 
American  crew  was  beaten  several  times,  despite  the 
men's  splendid  muscular  development,  their  excellent 
training  and  unity,  because  it  had  adopted  a  less  effective 
stroke.  This  cause  of  inferiority  having  been  recognized, 
the  Oxford  men  thought  of  the  following  manly  thing  to 
do;  they  sent  Harvard  their  own  coach,  a  graduate  of 
Oxford  University  and  a  perfect  gentleman,  who  was  to 
spend  six  months  teaching  the  Harvard  crew  the  use  of 
the  Oxford  stroke.  I  saw  Mr.  Lehmann  arrive  from 
England;  the  Harvard  students  gave  him  a  magnificent 
reception;  in  the  cheering  which  greeted  him,  in  the 
enthusiasm  of  thousands  of  students  shouting  their  ad- 
miration in  loud  hurrahs  was  expressed,  I  think,  one  of 
the  noblest  emotions  of  the  human  soul — the  recognition 
of  generosity. 

The  example  which  comes  from  above  descends  from 
Oxford  and  Cambridge  into  all  the  social  classes.  Ath- 
letics thus  understood  become  a  school  of  dignity  and  of 
moral  elevation  which  penetrates  the  entire  nation  and 
permeates  even  the  lower  classes.  The  soldiers  of  the 
regular  army,  the  "Tommies"  who  were  the  first  to  fight 
for  us  in  France,  although  often  recruited  among  the 
social  outcasts,  have  learned  fair  play  and  self-respect  in 
the  practice  of  sports.  They  are  capable  of  responding  to 
the  lofty  appeal  of  their  officers,  who  are  born  gentlemen 
and  representatives  of  the  best  type  of  English  moral 
idealism.  Indeed  these  professional  soldiers,  whom  the 
Germans  sought  to  brand  with  the  name  of  "mercenaries  " 
and  whom  they  treat  shamefully  as  prisoners,  gave  these 
Barbarians  a  lesson  of  decent  behaviour  and  common 
humanity  which  the  world  will  not  fail  to  appreciate. 
Still  more  plainly  does  the  great  volunteer  army  fighting 
now  in  Picardy  prove  itself  worthy  of  the  chivalrous 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  251 

traditions  which  are  the  honour  of  the  English  nation. 
The  army  is  ready  to  do  its  duty,  determined  to  use  force 
with  those  who  have  rendered  themselves  doubly  criminal 
by  their  initial  aggression  and  by  their  atrocious  fashion 
of  conducting  the  war;  but  it  is  just  as  much  incapable, 
as  our  own  army,  of  abandoning  itself  to  the  instincts 
of  the  brute,  of  making  use  of  treachery,  or  of  giving  itself 
up  to  an  orgy  of  murder  committed  against  innocent 
beings  without  defence. 

The  English  did  not  want  war,  because  even  when  waged 
with  humanity  and  prosecuted  against  armies  alone  and 
not  against  women,  old  men,  and  children,  war  is  atrocious. 
Far  from  making  a  "national  industry"  of  war,  as  our 
enemies  did,  they  were  unwilling  to  prepare  for  it  even 
on  the  ground  of  sheer  necessity.  Until  the  last  moment 
they  hoped,  by  dint  of  liberalism  and  reasonable  con- 
cession, to  avoid  its  scourge.  Once  the  war  was  declared, 
despite  the  passionate  hate  with  which  the  Germans 
pursued  them,  they  refused  to  allow  themselves  to  be 
dominated  by  anger  or  the  spirit  of  revenge.  They  were 
even  slow  to  be  moved,  largely,  no  doubt,  because  England 
was  not  invaded,  but  also  because  the  violence  which  war 
entails  was  repugnant  to  their  notions  of  true  sport. 
They  came  near  being  too  late  in  defending  themselves 
and  in  defending  European  equity  with  us,  because  of  a 
certain  gentlemanly  haughtiness.  But  Germany  took  care 
to  teach  them  that  war  of  booty  and  murder,  as  she  under- 
stood it,  admits  neither  considerations  of  pity  nor  acts  of 
imprudent  magnanimity.  And  while  it  is  true  that  they 
entered  the  campaign  with  a  certain  aristocratic  non- 
chalance, they  soon  learned  to  change  their  attitude;  the 
ferocity  and  baseness  due  to  systematized  native  bar- 
barism, practiced  in  the  opposite  camp  not  only  in  the 
ranks  of  the  professional  trooper  but  also  in  the  highest 


252  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

degrees  of  the  hierarchy,  soon  convinced  them  of  the 
necessity  of  throttling  the  monster.  It  is  no  longer  a 
question  of  esteem  for  an  adversary  whom  one  would 
like  to  respect,  but  a  question  of  justice  and  reparation 
in  keeping  with  the  magnitude  of  the  crime.  The  Times 
expressed  this  clearly  in  an  article  written  after  the  act  of 
piracy  committed  by  a  German  submarine,  which  cost  the 
lives  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  passengers  of  the  Falaba: 
"We  are  slow  in  getting  started.  But  when  our  indig- 
nation has  been  aroused,  nothing  can  arrest  or  temper 
the  inevitableness  of  our  prosecution  of  the  criminal." 
The  English,  like  the  French,  however,  will  not  lower 
themselves  to  the  shame  of  retaliation  by  the  use  of 
Teutonic  methods.  But  like  ourselves,  they  will  persevere 
even  to  the  end,  being  tenacious  in  overcoming  obstacles 
and  implacable  in  the  demand  of  guarantees  destined  to 
assure  the  future. 

Firmness  in  repression,  once  the  responsibilities  are 
established,  is  only  a  form  of  loyalty;  loyalty  to  oneself 
and  loyalty  toward  the  task  undertaken.  Indeed  recti- 
tude is  really  loyalty,  and  rectitude  is  an  English  quality. 
It  is  not  merely  in  the  competitions  of  the  athletic  field 
that  the  Englishman  has  confidence  in  others  and  inspires 
their  confidence;  this  is  true  concerning  the  acts  of  daily 
life  and  more  particularly  concerning  the  shifting  sands  of 
commercial  competition.  In  the  opinion  of  the  generality 
of  business  men,  no  other  is  more  honest  than  English 
commerce.  The  goods  which  leave  the  over-channel 
factories  may  have  defects  but  they  are  of  excellent 
quality  and  promise  no  more  than  they  can  fulfil.  Previ- 
ous to  the  importation  of  objects  "Made  in  Germany" 
goods  of  inferior  quality  were  unknown  in  England. 
The  word  of  an  Englishman  in  business  has  the  value 
of  an  oath.  The  English  merchant  does  not  vaunt  the 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  253 

articles  which  he  has  for  sale,  for,  in  his  eyes,  any  insist- 
ence would  be  equivalent  to  insincerity.  If  you  go  into  a 
shop  the  clerk  replies  laconically  to  your  demands,  he 
shows  you  the  articles  for  sale,  he  mentions  their  price 
and,  if  you  hesitate  about  buying,  he  leaves  you  to  your 
meditation,  without  troubling  himself  further  about  you. 
The  more  important  business  transactions  are  concluded 
on  parole:  there  is  no  need  of  writing.  A  business  man 
who  should  pretend  to  have  forgotten  his  engagement 
or  the  conditions  agreed  upon  would  be  discredited  for 
life.  I  have  still  in  my  mind  the  answer — remarkable 
for  its  directness  and  simplicity — which  a  boat-builder  of 
Hampton  Court  made  to  a  certain  query  of  mine.  He 
was  an  unpretentious  mechanic  who  worked  alone  with 
his  son  in  a  small  yard  on  the  banks  of  the  Thames;  his 
Canadian  canoes  had  struck  me  because  of  their  excellent 
lines  and  finish,  their  elegance  and  solidity  combined. 
The  canoe  had  to  be  sent  to  France ;  he  asked  me  to  pay  the 
price  in  advance.  I  hesitated  a  moment.  "On  the  word 
of  an  English  citizen,"  said  he  simply,  "you'll  have  your 
canoe  in  three  weeks  with  all  your  rigging!"  I  trusted 
him  .  .  .  any  one  acquainted  with  English  probity 
would  not  have  refused  him  their  confidence. 

In  France  we  were  wont  to  speak,  in  the  days  of  our 
misunderstandings  with  England,  of  a  "perfidious  Al- 
bion." It  is  only  common  justice  today  to  reconsider 
our  judgment.  In  the  matter  of  colonial  expansion — 
precisely  where  we  were  the  rivals  of  the  English — the 
conditions  change  from  year  to  year;  circumstances  which 
permit  certain  concessions  at  a  certain  time,  do  not  allow 
doing  so  at  another.  Gladstone,  for  instance,  did  not  wish 
to  occupy  Egypt.  The  offer  which  he  made  to  France  and 
then  to  Italy  to  co-operate  in  the  police  operation  which 
was  the  origin  of  the  Egyptian  campaign  is  a  proof  of 
this.  But  the  occupation  had  to  be  continued  for  strategic 


254  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

and  financial  reasons;  England  undertook  certain  public 
works,  employed  her  capital  there  and  began  work  neces- 
sary for  the  good  of  the  country  and  consequently  for  its 
pacification,  as  well  as  indispensable  for  its  financial 
prosperity  and  consequently  for  its  solvability.  The 
revolt  of  the  Soudan  necessitated  an  expedition  which 
the  "piece-meal"  system  rendered  very  laborious.  Now 
once  the  honour  of  the  flag  is  engaged,  a  great  nation 
cannot  recede.  A  conquest  once  begun  at  the  price  of 
much  blood  and  treasure  can  scarcely  be  abandoned. 
England  had  no  intention  of  remaining  in  Egypt,  but  the 
logic  of  events  obliged  her  to  do  so.  Let  us  reflect  on 
certain  consequences  of  our  own  colonial  expeditions; 
we  might  be  accused  of  perfidy  in  cases  where  we  have 
only  obeyed  certain  exigencies  of  the  inevitable.  Political 
realism  has  its  laws:  there  are  natural  frontiers  which 
must  be  reached,  certain  animosities  which  must  be  over- 
come, certain  anarchical  practices  which  must  be  re- 
pressed, economic  possibilities  which  must  be  developed. 
A  nation  the  work  of  which  is  to  civilize,  which  would 
shun  its  task  through  fear  of  being  accused  of  perfidy, 
would  fail  in  its  mission.  We  understand  the  whole 
question  better  today,  and  we  no  longer  repeat  the  empty 
phrases  concerning  a  "perfidious  Albion." 

.  .  .  We  know  now,  alas!  what  the  perfidy  of  a  nation 
really  means.  What  people  has  been  preparing  war  for 
forty  years,  allaying  the  fears  of  its  neighbours  meanwhile 
with  feigned  words  of  peace  ?  What  people,  at  the  supreme 
moment,  precipitated  hostilities  by  means  of  an  unjust 
quarrel,  while  trying  to  throw  the  blame  on  others,  and 
when  once  it  had  determined  to  attack,  tore  up  the  "scrap 
of  paper"  protecting  a  defenceless  country  and  martyrized 
that  country  in  bitterness  and  hate,  denying  its  crimes 
in  the  very  hour  of  their  committal?  What  people,  in 
order  to  vanquish  without  risk,  sheltered  its  mitrailleuses 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  255 

behind  the  Cross  of  Geneva  and  its  cannon  behind  a 
living  wall  of  women  and  children  swaying  with  anguish, 
and  in  order  to  spread  terror  in  the  land  left  a  trail  of 
murder  and  fire  in  its  wake,  machine-gunned  the  hostages 
by  hundreds,  led  away  the  survivors  into  bondage, 
dispatched  the  wounded,  wrecked  hospitals,  and  bom- 
barded cathedrals?  What  people  having  hypocritically 
put  its  signature  to  The  Hague  agreements,  disowned  the 
engagements  solemnized  before  the  world?  If  you  want 
perfidy — base  and  cruel  perfidy — there  it  is.  For  such 
perfidy  as  this  the  English  people  conceived  a  sentiment 
of  indignation  mingled  with  horror.  Their  humanity 
revolted — as  the  conscience  of  the  civilized  world  will 
revolt  when  the  last  fears  inspired  by  Germany  have 
vanished — and  they  rose  in  arms.  This  people  which 
in  all  spheres,  in  family  and  school  education,  in  the 
practice  of  manly  sports,  in  business  and  daily  living 
cultivates  the  idealism  of  plighted  faith,  of  respect  for 
humanity  in  men,  of  generous  rivalry  and  chivalrous 
competition  cannot  repress  a  feeling  of  scorn,  today,  for 
the  nation  which  shamefully  deceived  its  trust,  in  the 
hour  when  it  was  most  trusted. 

The  English  "State,"  naturally  realist  and  resolutely 
practical,  has  defended  its  interests  at  times  with  an 
asperity  which  has  caused  its  opponents  to  resist  most 
sharply.  This  is  why  France  has  a  number  of  painful 
memories  to  recall.  But  whatever  shocks  our  sensitive- 
ness may  have  received  on  certain  occasions,  we  cannot 
reproach  the  British  Government  with  treason.  This 
Government  does  not  counterfeit  dispatches  nor  tear  up 
treaties  nor  invent  certain  casus  belli,  nor  flood  the  world 
with  false  news,  nor  accuse  victimized  countries  of  having 
provoked  the  executioner.  The  English  "State"  has 
often  been  ambitious  and  overbold  in  the  pursuit  of  its 
ambitions;  but  it  has  never  built  up  falsehood  into  a  sys- 


256  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

tern  nor  created  a  government  doctrine  out  of  duplicity 
and  cynicism,  nor  declared  that  Might  is  Right.  It 
has  a  conscience;  this  conscience  is  the  synthesis  of  the 
English  citizens'  conscience  and  an  image  of  the  national 
probity. 

The  Englishman  is  fair  and  upright,  because  he  is  a 
person  in  the  full  sense  of  the  word,  and  because  he  belongs 
to  a  society  in  which  every  individual  of  any  value  is 
truly  a  person.  In  England,  thought,  feeling,  and  conduct 
are  less  dependent  on  exterior  forces  and  State  authority 
than  in  any  country.  Less  than  anywhere  else  acts  are 
dictated  by  administrative  regulations  or  national  au- 
tomatism. There  is  very  strong  public  opinion  in  England, 
but  it  is  less  a  routine  than  the  expression  of  individual 
judgments.  Upon  certain  essential  points  these  individual 
judgments  fall  into  order  through  a  process  of  harmony; 
upon  other  matters  they  diverge,  at  times,  even  to  ec- 
centricity, and  no  one  finds  reason  for  complaint  in  that. 
This  independence,  tempered  by  discipline,  is  the  most 
precious  effect  of  that  quality  which  the  English  call  self- 
control.  The  whole  economy  of  education  among  them 
tends  to  develop  this  self-control,  the  supreme  dignity 
of  the  individual  to  which  the  nation  owes  its  steady  bear- 
ing, its  moral  vigour,  and  its  force  of  will — the  prop  and 
stay  of  its  material  force. 

In  the  schools,  the  moral  formation  of  the  individual 
assumes  such  importance  that  for  a  long  time  his  intel- 
lectual training  was  neglected  because  of  it.  In  France 
we  have  drawn  inspiration  from  their  methods;  we  might 
still  borrow  a  great  deal  from  them.  Instead  of  keeping 
the  adolescent  in  leading  strings  and  making  him  believe 
that  the  master  is  responsible  for  the  group  and  that  any 
act  which  escapes  his  supervision  is,  for  that  reason,  excus- 
able, the  young  Englishman  is  led  little  by  little  to  depend 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  257 

upon  himself  and  to  find  the  real  judges  of  his  actions 
within  himself,  thanks  to  the  direct  application  of  the 
precepts  of  a  practical  code  of  morals.  Nothing  is 
more  delicate  or  more  complex  than  this  initiation  of  an 
unstamped  conscience  into  the  mystery  of  noble  and 
meritorious  conduct.  To  succeed  in  this  one  must  have 
the  approved  methods  of  a  long  tradition,  the  close  and 
devoted  collaboration  of  the  parents  and  teachers  and — 
what  is  not  an  exaggeration — the  benevolent  conspiracy 
of  the  whole  nation.  Thanks  to  these  methods  and 
influences,  the  child  learns  little  by  little  to  shoulder 
responsibilities,  to  act,  in  the  absence  of  supervision,  as 
if  the  advisory  or  repressive  authority  were  present  and 
to  seek  within  himself  the  approval  or  disapproval  which 
lifts  or  lowers  him  in  his  own  eyes.  The  father  or  school- 
master prescribes  or  forbids  at  a  distance  without  interfer- 
ing in  the  acts ;  they  remain  in  constant  moral  communica- 
tion with  the  child,  but  without  imposing  their  presence, 
and  without  doing  anything  likely  to  repress  responsibility. 
At  home  the  child  finds  guidance  and  support,  but  is 
not  reduced  to  passive  obedience.  The  English  school- 
boy enjoys  a  fulness  of  liberty  unknown  to  his  continental 
comrade,  but  this  liberty  is  surrounded  by  rules  which 
continue  to  keep  his  conscience  and  will  on  the  alert. 
The  older  boys  exercise  authority  over  the  younger,  and 
they  in  their  turn,  learn  to  take  up  the  task  of  commanding. 
A  natural  hierarchy  is  thus  formed;  it  is  the  image  of  the 
social  hierarchy  without  which  no  refined  nation  can  exist. 
In  each  group  such  traditions  develop  an  "esprit  de 
corps"  made  up  of  self-respect  and  the  respect  of  authority 
which  is  just.  The  sentiment  of  honour  is  nourished  by 
the  self-esteem  of  the  group,  and,  outside  of  the  group,  by 
national  pride.  Repression  is  rare,  but,  when  necessary, 
is  severely  inflicted,  because,  in  the  English  system,  a 
fault  is  a  breach  of  trust.  Punishment — the  symbol  of 

17 


258  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

the  immanent  law  of  the  world — constitutes  the  check. 
But  it  seldom  has  to  be  resorted  to. 

When  the  boy  grows  into  a  youth,  freedom  of  action 
increases  for  him  in  the  moral  sphere,  but  decreases  in  the 
material.  The  English  University  student  is  protected 
against  himself  by  a  set  of  rules  which  bridle  his  instincts 
without  lessening  his  responsibility.  The  moral  aim 
occupies  the  entire  foreground  of  higher  education,  just 
as  it  does  at  the  other  levels  of  the  English  school  system. 
There  is  no  "Bohemia"  at  Oxford.  But  there  does  ex- 
ist for  the  meditative  student,  in  leisure  hours,  a  world 
for  musing  under  the  age-old  oaks,  in  the  meadow  calm  on 
the  Cherwell  River  banks,  on  the  drowsy  lawns,  and  in  the 
sacred  walks  where  many  of  England's  greatest  sons  were 
wont  to  stroll.  For  the  energetic  student  there  are  games 
and  rowing  and  training  for  big  matches.  For  everyone 
there  exists  a  means  of  initiation  into  civic  life  in  the 
solemn  debates  of  the  Union  and  of  initiation  into  social 
life  in  the  numerous  clubs  which  group  activities,  in- 
clinations, or  fantasies  according  to  their  natural  bias. 
In  that  abode  of  knowledge  and  of  tradition,  one  breathes 
an  atmosphere  of  intellectual  refinement  and  moral  sanity, 
all  instinct  with  humanism  and  piety  for  the  glories  of 
the  past. 

But  whether  they  have  received  the  aristocratic  educa- 
tion of  Oxford  or  the  solid  moral  education  of  the  public 
or  private  schools,  the  English  have  been  shaped  with 
more  or  less  precision  into  becoming  moral  persons.  Just 
as  in  the  schools,  an  "esprit  de  corps"  made  of  what  is 
best  in  the  national  spirit  permeates  the  regiments  which 
have  taken  their  places  in  the  trenches.  What  a  distance 
there  is  between  this  people,  nourished  consciously  with 
Christian  and  human  idealism,  penetrated,  even  among  the 
humblest,  with  the  sap  of  moral  individualism,  and  the 
German  people  capable  of  being  huddled  like  a  herd  into 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  259 

the  vagaries  of  Kultur  and  the  abominations  of  the 
doctrine  of  war  as  officially  prescribed  by  the  Kaiser's 
General  Staff.  It  is  difficult  to  imagine  the  English  people 
listening  to  speeches  like  the  one  which  the  German  Em- 
peror addressed  to  his  troops  at  the  time  of  their  departure 
for  the  Chinese  expedition:  "Just  as,  a  thousand  years  ago, 
the  Huns  with  Attila  their  King  acquired  a  name  which, 
even  today,  makes  them  appear  powerful  in  tradition 
and  legend,  just  so  the  German  name  must  for  a  thousand 
years  be  asserted  in  such  a  way  that  no  Chinaman  will  ever 
dare  look  askance  at  a  German. ' '  Nor  is  it  easy  to  imagine 
the  English  people  accepting  the  war  theory  of  General 
Julius  von  Hartmann:  "The  combatant  has  need  of 
passion.  All  military  effort  necessitates  that  the  fighter 
who  furnishes  this  effort  be  totally  free  from  all  annoying 
and  oppressive  legal  obstacles.  ..."  The  English  and 
the  French  cannot  overcome  their  astonishment  at  this 
systematic  brutifying  of  a  whole  nation.  The  annihila- 
tion of  the  individual  conscience  cannot  be  more  complete. 

The  Englishman  whose  whole  education  furthers  self- 
control,  is  led  by  the  same  methods  and  by  the  same 
influences  towards  independence  of  thought.  Within 
the  family  the  parents  respect  the  children's  opinion  as 
soon  as  a  certain  amount  of  experience,  the  lessons  of 
school  life,  and  the  knowledge  acquired  by  reading  permit 
them  to  form  general  ideas  and  to  draw  consequences 
from  facts.  Authority  is  not  imposed  tyrannically;  its 
acceptance  is  the  result  of  reasoning  and  proof.  Thus  is 
developed  in  the  home  itself  that  spirit  of  criticism  which 
represents  the  vital  and  progressive  force  of  a  nation. 
Very  early  in  the  school,  methodical  discussions  or  debates 
give  the  scholars  a  chance  to  put  their  observations 
and  reflections  into  practice  and  to  give  them  that  solid- 
ity, cohesion,  and  personal  accent  which  is  the  life  of 


260  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

* 

independent  thought.  On  a  given  subject,  volunteer 
speakers  undertake  to  defend  the  affirmative  or  the  nega- 
tive in  an  argument  of  a  few  moments'  lengths.  The 
argumentation  is  prepared  beforehand  but  the  contin- 
gencies of  the  discussion  oblige  the  opponents  to  improvise 
rebuttals  or  advance  new  facts  more  directly  adapted 
to  the  phases  of  the  debate.  At  the  end  those  present 
venture  a  few  short  remarks  and  a  general  vote  decides 
which  of  the  two  parties  has  succeeded  in  winning  the  ap- 
proval of  the  audience.  This  whole  process  affords  an 
excellent  training  for  intellectual  suppleness,  classification 
of  facts,  presentation  of  proofs,  invention  and  co-ordination 
of  ideas.  At  the  outset  the  subjects  chosen  are  common- 
place topics;  then  as  the  mind  ripens  and  knowledge  in- 
creases, moral,  political,  or  social  problems  are  broached. 
At  Oxford,  the  Union  is  a  real  Parliament  in  miniature 
where  more  than  one  future  statesman  has  given  promise 
of  that  power  of  thought  and  speech  destined  to  assure 
him  one  of  the  first  places  in  the  House  or  in  the  cabinet. 
Within  the  nation,  associations  of  all  sorts  are  formed 
for  the  purpose  of  making  inquiries  and  opening  discus- 
sion on  all  subjects  interesting  the  public  welfare.  In- 
tellectual activity,  which  should  be  a  characteristic  of 
every  free  citizen  under  the  parliamentary  regime,  is, 
then,  a  reality.  It  is  not  confined  simply  to  the  electoral 
period;  thanks  to  the  independence  and  mental  agility 
which  the  Englishman  acquires  from  his  school-days  on, 
civic  life  based  on  club  life  has  assumed  an  intensity  and 
a  continuity  to  which  few  members  of  the  community 
remain  strangers.  One  would  have  some  difficulty  in 
finding  an  Englishman  unable  to  speak  in  a  meeting,  or 
if  need  be,  to  preside  over  it.  The  British  parliamentary 
regime  does  not  merely  offer  the  appearance  of  liberty;  it 
really  enlists  the  personal  thought  of  all,  in  the  full  con- 
sciousness of  their  obligations  and  responsibilities. 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  261 

And  so  public  opinion  is  really  a  converging  of  free 
opinion,  each  party  contributing  its  programme,  each 
group  proposing  its  solution,  each  individual  supporting 
a  certain  shade  of  doctrine,  founded  on  facts  of  personal 
observation  and  upon  the  particular  reaction  of  his 
temperament,  of  his  education,  and  of  his  intellectual 
complexion.  How  far  removed  is  this  from  the  docility 
of  Germany,  where  in  matters  of  political  and  State  in- 
terest, the  Government  fashions  public  opinion  just  as  it 
pleases.  Since  Prussia  and  Bismarck  have  forced  the 
country  under  a  yoke  of  iron,  the  military  caste  has  been 
able,  without  resistance,  to  dictate  to  the  people  its 
ambitions  for  conquest  and  its  instinct  for  plunder.  A 
pandering  press  has  accomplished  its  work;  the  all- 
powerful  army  of  functionaries  has  acted  upon  the  timid, 
through  its  prestige  and  through  intimidation;  the  Reich- 
stag, under  the  appearance  of  a  parliamentary  assembly, 
has  assumed  more  and  more  the  character  of  a  House  of 
registration;  the  Socialists  themselves  have  rallied  to  the 
cause  of  triumphant  imperialism.  Since  the  war  began 
there  is  scarcely  an  absurd  falsehood  which  the  people 
have  not  swallowed  with  their  eyes  shut.  A  French 
medecin-major,  released  after  several  weeks  of  captivity, 
recently  exposed  in  the  following  terms  the  astonish- 
ment which  the  intellectual  inertia  and  artlessness  of  the 
German  people  had  caused  him : 

It  is  enough  for  the  powers-that-be  to  tell  them  some- 
thing, through  the  newspapers  or  administrative  channels, 
to  get  them  to  believe  everything.  When  it  was  seen  that  the 
entrance  into  Paris  was  no  longer  probable,  they  were  simply 
told  this:  "  The  authorities  did  not  choose  to  enter  Paris;  it 
would  have  been  necessary  to  bombard  it  and  the  bombard- 
ment of  so  beautiful  a  city  would  have  won  us  a  bad  reputation; 
furthermore  there  is  sickness  there  .  .  !" 


262  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

This  subrmssiveness  in  presence  of  authority  is  an 
attitude  to  which  the  German  people  are  curbed  as  early 
as  the  school,  which  increases  at  the  barracks,  and  which 
nothing  in  the  life  of  the  town  or  nation  happens  to  cor- 
rect. The  spirit  of  the  school  is  a  clear  indication  of  the 
spirit  of  the  nation.  Now  what  is  the  precise  aim  fixed 
by  headmasters  of  German  schools?  This  aim  is  to 
exalt  the  person  of  the  Emperor  in  whom  the  all-powerful 
State  is  personified.  In  other  countries  the  teaching  of 
History  while  serving  to  throw  the  national  glories  into 
relief,  also  serves  as  an  opportunity  to  get  the  children  to 
understand  the  movement  of  civilization  and  the  progress 
of  humanity.  Let  us  examine  the  manual  of  history  for 
the  Simultan-schulen  (that  is  for  the  primary  schools 
which  admit  pupils  of  different  creeds)  edited  at  Breslau 
and  sold  at  seventy  pfennig.  Shall  we  find  therein,  at  the 
beginning,  a  general  appreciation  of  the  formation  of 
Germany  and  of  the  European  States  by  which  it  would  be 
possible  to  impart  to  the  children  just  notions  about 
universal  history,  while  leaving  to  German  history  a 
preponderating  place?  Not  at  all.  The  first  chapter 
is  entitled  "Our  Imperial  House,"  and  the  Hohenzollern 
who  occupies  the  place  of  honour  is  no  other  than  William 
II.  A  surprising  number  of  pages,  in  so  short  a  book  are 
devoted  to  a  biography  of  the  Kaiser,  to  his  youthful 
doings,  to  his  studies,  to  his  "sayings,"  and  naturally,  to 
his  qualities  as  father  of  the  people  and  chief  of  the  army. 
The  Kaiser  becomes  a  semi-divine  personage,  thanks  to 
the  gifts  which  he  has  received  from  heaven,  and  thanks 
to  the  intimacy  to  which  his  rank  and  lights  entitle  him 
with  the  Creator  himself — the  "Old  German  God." 
And  so  is  formed  that  idolatry  of  the  Emperor  which 
maintains  a  current  of  mystic  ecstasy  among  the  people 
and  which  holds  German  thought  and  German  will  mes- 
merized under  the  yoke  of  militarism  and  State-ism.  Far 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  263 

from  the  individual  conscience  being  put  into  touch  with 
eternal  humanity  by  means  of  the  school,  it  is  trained 
to  become  the  passive  instrument  of  a  government  of  prey. 
As  soon  as  the  child  has  acquired  his  elementary  know- 
ledge, he  is  placed  in  a  technical  school  where  his  useful- 
ness and  productive  capacity  are  developed  with  a  view  to 
the  increased  profits  of  commerce  and  industry — each  of 
which  is  an  essential  wheel  of  war.  Between  the  artificial 
"heating"  of  warlike  passions  and  the  "drill"  of  the 
practical  faculties  there  is  no  room  for  reason  and  sane 
judgment,  that  is,  for  what  properly  constitutes  the  man. 
The  spirit  of  the  English  primary  school,  in  harmony 
with  public  spirit  and  the  national  customs,  tends  to 
develop  in  the  child  upright  and  manly  independence.  It 
finds  its  inspiration  in  idealism  which  places  the  universal 
interests  of  humanity  above  national  selfishness.  English 
patriotism  is  not  reduced  to  a  savage  form  of  cupidity;  it 
is  consistent  with  sympathy  for  other  peoples,  with  the 
principle  of  right,  and  with  European  solidarity.  At 
the  beginning  of  the  war  the  English  President  of  the 
Board  of  Education  in  a  circular  letter  called  the  school- 
master's attention  to  the  lofty  aim  of  instruction.  We 
recognize  in  his  words  the  very  principles  that  France, 
more  than  any  other  nation,  has  contributed  to  dissemi- 
nate in  the  world. 

We  are  [says  the  President]  trustees  for  posterity.  The 
seven  million  children  trusted  to  our  care  represent  the  future 
of  England.  ...  At  the  end  of  this  war,  we  shall  have  to 
rebuild  not  only  the  material  structure  of  civilization,  but  also 
to  reaffirm  its  spiritual  purpose.  .  .  .  We  shall  hand  over  to 
our  children  the  principles  of  national  and  international  policy 
which  emerge  from  the  present  struggle,  a  form  of  society, 
we  hope,  broader  and  more  stable,  free  from  the  secular  in- 
heritance of  hatred  and  conquest  which  Europe  is  now  expiat- 
ing, but  at  the  same  time  more  exacting  and  demanding 


264  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

more  ample  faculties  in  all,  better  exercised  capacities  and  a 
clearer  view  of  the  common  duties  and  the  common  destinies 
of  mankind. 


A  nation  which  proposes  such  a  lofty  ideal  to  its  teachers 
is  in  a  fit  position  really  to  understand  the  great  grandsons 
of  the  men  of  the  Revolution  and  the  sons  of  Michelet 
and  Victor  Hugo.  The  English  and  the  French  are  as 
far  removed  from  the  Germans  of  today  as  the  Athenians 
of  Plato's  time  from  the  subjects  of  the  "Great  King." 

In  the  upper  degrees  of  the  English  University  organi- 
zation, classical  culture  contributes  an  element  of  good 
taste,  tact,  and  sane  reason  to  the  fundamental  moral 
education.  The  more  important  schools  and  the  influ- 
ence of  good  society  both  help  to  fashion  that  product 
of  centuries  of  civilization — that  masterpiece  of  the  moral 
effort  of  a  high-minded  people — known  as  the  English 
gentleman.  .  .  .  The  "gentleman"  descends  from  a  long 
line  of  ancestors.  The  founder  of  the  family  is  often  dis- 
covered under  the  armour  of  some  knight  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  who  had  received  the  traditions  of  valour  and 
courtesy  at  the  hands  of  the  French  chevaliers  and  whose 
models  had  been  the  companions  of  King  Arthur,  cele- 
brated with  equal  piety  by  our  trouveres  and  by  English 
poets.  In  the  course  of  time,  the  knight  is  succeeded 
by  the  courtier  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign,  a  good  hu- 
manist and  a  valiant  warrior,  intrepid  and  generous  in 
battle,  a  devotee  of  platonic  love,  anxious  for  the  esteem 
of  his  peers  as  a  hero  of  Plutarch  and  for  the  esteem  of 
his  dependents  as  a  good  Christian.  Then  follows  the 
gallant  nobleman  of  the  eighteenth  century  who  is  fond 
of  intellectual  culture  and  the  graces  of  French  politeness, 
and  who  appears  to  advantage  in  fashionable  literary 
circles,  in  clubs  for  serious  discussion  or  in  the  "guerre  en 


The  Modern  English  Spirit  265 

dentelles"  at  Fontenoy.  With  the  nineteenth  century, 
the  family  increases;  many  of  its  members  dispense  with 
the  coat  of  arms.  The  character  of  the  gentleman  be- 
comes less  aristocratic,  without  losing  its  noble  qualities, 
and  becomes  enriched  with  middle- class  virtues.  To- 
day, the  gentleman  is  a  well-bred  man,  an  example  of 
ease  and  polished  manners  which  are  simply  the  expres- 
sion in  word  and  deed  of  his  innate  distinction.  He  is 
familiar  with  the  great  productions  of  the  human  mind  in 
antiquity  and  in  modern  times,  having  really  assimilated 
their  substance.  He  is  dignified  in  his  habits  from 
self-respect,  an  enemy  of  falsehood  from  horror  of  all 
falsehood,  moderate  without  condescension  in  his  opin- 
ions, proud  without  disdain,  sensitive  without  weakness, 
resolute  and  firm  without  wanting  in  necessary  tact, 
generous  and  chivalrous  from  broad-mindedness  and 
magnanimity.  The  "gentleman"  has  much  in  common 
with  the  "homme  distingue"  of  whom  our  French  civili- 
zation is  justly  proud.  With  the  Frenchman,  the  qualities 
of  reason,  of  proportion  and  measure,  of  delicacy,  of 
sociability,  and  of  generous  idealism  have  produced  much 
the  same  human  value  as  the  qualities  of  will,  of  the 
moral  sense,  of  traditional  firmness  and  vigorous  individ- 
ualism in  the  Englishman.  Both  are  keenly  aware  of  the 
place  which  the  German — even  when  saturated  with  all 
that  Kultur  can  give  him — occupies  in  the  scale  of  civiliza- 
tion. For  want  of  a  fitting  milieu,  of  ancient  traditions, 
and  especially  innate  nobleness,  German  qualities  are 
rarely  capable  of  rising  above  the  practical  order  of 
things,  and  German  virtues  often  remain  intimately 
tinged  with  clannish  or  racial  egoism.  With  this  people, 
the  man  who  rises  above  the  common  level  is  the  ' '  Special- 
ist" who  can  succeed  by  dint  of  perseverance,  minute 
prevision,  and  tenacity,  in  overcoming  a  given  task  in 
fields  where  genius  is  equivalent  to  a  long  effort  of  patience. 


266  The  Modern  English  Spirit 

But  if  he  happens  to  be  outside  of  his  scientific  branch, 
his  field  as  a  professional  expert,  or  .his  industrial  section, 
he  is  often  found  to  be  awkward,  ostentatious,  and  dull. 
Beyond  his  particular  sphere  or  his  Fach,  the  German 
scholar  or  merchant  has  little  or  no  kinship  with  men. 
When  war  breaks  out — war  which  shatters  the  thin 
veneering  of  restraint  and  decency — their  primeval  in- 
stincts reappear.  That  is  why  the  conduct  of  these 
people  in  arms,  both  officers  and  men,  has  been  the  scan- 
dal and  shame  of  humanity.  Their  thinkers,  from  the 
depths  of  the  Universities,  have  attempted  to  excuse  them 
by  crying  aloud  to  the  world.  "The  German  Army 
has  committed  no  undisciplined  cruelty,  Keine  zuchtlose 
Grausamkeit."  The  most  atrocious  cruelties  have  in  fact 
"been  disciplined,"  that  is,  committed  by  order  and 
methodically.  The  stain  which  dishonours  Germany  is 
the  fact  that  the  officer  in  her  army  is  not  a  "gentleman." 

A  misguided  education,  an  intellect  cramped  by  mate- 
rialism, the  self-intoxications  of  pride  and  domineering 
ambition,  and,  alas,  the  brutality  of  a  thinly  varnished 
barbarism,  such  are  the  causes  which  have  prevented  the 
German  people  from  learning  the  noble  qualities  which 
Kant  and  Goethe  had  tried  to  teach  them,  and  from 
welcoming  the  humanizing  influences  of  the  society  of 
nations. 

The  English  belong  to  another  race. 

By  their  customs,  their  traditions,  the  rich  alluvium  of 
civilization  slowly  deposited  in  their  soul,  their  ideal  of 
education  and  moral  excellence,  they  are  profoundly 
different  from  those  who  called  them  "cousins"  before 
vowing  them  eternal  hatred.  The  English  feel,  as  we 
do,  that  a  struggle  is  taking  place  in  this  war  between 
two  civilizations  and  that  the  triumph  of  Kultur  would 
be  the  death  of  human  culture. 


CHAPTER  X 

THe  Spirit  of  Modern  England  as  Revealed  in 
Her  Literature 

PR  the  study  of  the  moral  physiognomy  of  England 
during  the  century  in  which  the  mediate  causes 
of  the  war  were  preparing  literature  offers  us  a 
precious  source  of  information.  There  can  be  no  question 
of  including  the  aggregate  English  literary  production; 
so  comprehensive  a  study  would  only  lead  to  a  tedious 
analysis,  and  would,  moreover,  only  indirectly  serve  our 
purpose.  We  shall  attain  our  end  by  choosing  in  the 
nineteenth  century  a  certain  number  of  significant  works, 
the  vital  and  unquestioned  influence  of  which  is,  in  a 
manner,  an  indication  of  the  ideas  and  sentiments  which 
prevail  today.  We  shall  pay  particular  attention  to  the 
authors  who  have  interpreted  the  deep  and  lasting  traits 
of  the  English  soul  and  to  those  who  have  prepared  or 
developed  sympathy  for  France. 

Now  if  there  is,  among  the  beauties  and  grandeur  of 
English  literature,  a  quality  which  is  pre-eminently  dis- 
tinctive, it  is  without  any  doubt  the  moral  quality.  More 
than  any  other,  the  English  people  have  always  been 
interested  in  questions  of  conduct,  and  deeply  absorbed 
in  the  problem  of  duty.  More  than  any  other,  English 
literature,  in  all  phases  of  its  development,  has  been 
dominated  by  the  ethical  point  of  view  and  imbued  with 
the  didactic  spirit  in  its  highest  form,  namely  that  which 

267 


268       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

attains  the  innermost  recesses  of  conscience  and  which 
counsels  the  more  fundamental  and  nobler  self-sacrifices. 
Let  us  call  to  mind  the  great  names  inscribed  ofi  the 
Pantheon  of  English  Letters.  In  the  fourteenth  century, 
the  old  story-teller  Chaucer  traces,  with  a  touching  and 
sincere  naivete,  the  lofty  ideal  of  the  doughty  knight, 
valiant  in  combat  and  clement  in  victory.  During  the 
Renaissance,  Spenser  seeks  inspiration  in  the  Knight's 
reverence  for  honour  and  in  the  platonic  worship  of  love, 
to  paint  the  dignity  and  nobleness  of  the  ideal  court  of 
the  Faerie  Queene.  Shakespeare,  a  powerful  realist  and 
a  great  poet,  is  admired  in  England  not  only  for  his  in- 
comparable dramatic  genius  but  also  for  his  wisdom — 
for  that  gift  of  penetration  and  reflexion  which  allows 
him  to  express  with  imagery  and  splendour  the  most 
profound  and  genuine  maxims  of  human  action.  Milton, 
in  the  twelve  cantos  of  his  majestic  epic,  treats  the  prob- 
lem of  the  origin  of  evil.  Later,  when  the  English  novel 
assumes  its  modern  form  in  the  eighteenth  century,  it  is 
characterized  from  the  outset  by  its  moral  tone.  The 
romantic  movement  which  in  other  countries  is  a  burst 
of  passion,  a  clamour  of  revolt,  or  a  desperate  elan  towards 
the  inaccessible  and  the  infinite,  gives  birth  in  England 
to  the  sober-minded,  sane,  and  appeasing  work  of  Words- 
worth as  well  as  the  violence  of  Byron  and  the  ecstasies 
of  Shelley. 

By  the  purity  and  serenity  of  his  thought,  and  by  the 
importance  which  his  moral  doctrine  assumed,  at  the 
critical  moment  when  it  appeared,  Wordsworth  takes 
rank  as  one  of  the  guides  of  the  English  conscience  of 
today.  Ruskin  becomes  his  disciple.  The  poet  and 
thinker,  Matthew  Arnold,  has  collected  in  a  much-read 
volume,  the  better  and  more  touching  of  his  lines.  The 
veteran  philosopher  of  liberalism,  Lord  John  Morley, 
before  entering  on  his  career  as  a  man  of  letters  and  a 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       269 

statesman,  undertakes  a  study  of  Wordsworth  as  a  moral- 
ist which  now  ranks  as  an  authoritative  work.  The 
author  of  the  Lyrical  Ballads  and  the  Excursion  is,  then, 
one  of  those  who  should  first  hold  our  attention,  because 
of  the  considerable  value — both  intrinsic  and  indicative — 
of  his  works. 

A  contemporary  of  the  French  Revolution  and  an  heir 
of  the  generation  of  philosophers  who  had  reconstructed 
on  a  purely  human  basis  the  postulates  or  principles  of 
spiritual  life,  Wordsworth  placed  all  his  hope  at  first  in  the 
political  and  social  renovation  by  which  France  seemed  to 
announce  to  the  world  an  era  of  happiness  and  progress. 
Like  most  of  those  who  were  witnesses  of  the  terrible 
vicissitudes  of  that  epoch,  he  lost  the  faith  which  he 
had  too  confidently  placed  in  institutions  and  forms  of 
government ;  he  did  not  lose  faith,  however,  in  the  regenera- 
tion of  man  by  man  himself.  He  turned  aside  from  the 
delusive  struggles  of  assemblies  and  armies  and  having 
retired  to  the  rustic  solitude  of  the  "Lake  Country," 
lived  in  an  inner  world  of  his  own,  opening  his  mind 
to  the  kindly  influences  of  nature  and  questioning  the 
simple  heart  of  the  peasant.  He  believed  that  from  the 
charm  of  the  flowers,  the  stern  grandeur  of  the  cliffs, 
the  mystery  of  the  woods,  the  peace  of  the  thatched  cot- 
tage, the  sublimity  of  sweeping  horizons  emanated  an 
atmosphere  of  health  and  moral  vigour.  He  read  laws  of 
moderation  and  justice,  of  effort  and  constancy,  of  devo- 
tion and  love  in  the  open  pages  of  the  great  book  of  nature, 
learning  therein  joy  from  the  bird's  song,  patience  from 
the  stream  deepening  its  bed,  and  law  from  the  planets 
immutable  in  their  course.  His  poetry  was  thus  enriched 
with  exquisite  touches  in  which  the  delicate  or  splendid 
aspects  of  the  external  world  were  intimately  allied  with  the 
tender  or  whole-souled  impulses  of  the  human  heart. 

Whatever  judgment  the  philosopher  may  be  inclined  to 


270       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

form,  in  terms  of  strict  criticism,  upon  this  interpretation 
of  the  origin  of  moral  ideas,  it  is  none  the  less  true  that 
there  exists  in  such  an  alliance  a  source  of  rich,  appealing, 
and  invigorating  poetry. 

From  this  source,  English  nineteenth-century  literature 
has  drawn  deep  emotions  and  fruitful  lessons  which  by  the 
contagion  of  idealism  and  the  invading  force  of  beauty 
have  set  their  mark  in  the  hearts  of  men.  Today  as  on 
the  first  day  of  their  appearance,  the  stanzas  of  the 
Lyrical  Ballads  awaken  melodious  memories:  the  mur- 
muring chorus  of  the  fields,  counsellor  of  simple  joy,  the 
notes  of  the  cuckoo,  messenger  of  mystery,  the  distant 
singing  of  the  harvester  telling  of  human  sympathy,  the 
thatched  cottage  in  ruins,  still  haunted  by  those  who 
are  no  more,  such  remain  symbols  of  kindliness,  of  things 
unknown,  of  tender  concern,  and  of  noble  appeals  to  up- 
right and  healthy  living. 

One  would  have  to  cite  the  more  beautiful  of  Words- 
worth's poems  to  give  an  adequate  idea  of  the  force  of 
suggestion,  of  the  influence  for  good,  and  of  the  power  of 
serenity  which  his  works  contain.  I  shall  choose  but  one 
selection,  the  theme  of  which  is  in  keeping  with  the  subject 
of  our  study,  namely  the  portrait  of  The  Happy  Warrior, 
who  accomplishes  his  duty  with  courage  but  who,  in  the 
midst  of  his  work  of  death  respects  humanity,  rectitude, 
and  clemency.  The  model  for  this  study  is  in  part  the 
brother  of  Wordsworth,  a  captain  of  the  merchant-marine 
who,  being  gifted  like  the  poet  himself  with  a  generous 
and  sensitive  soul,  had  remained  a  man  and  a  gentleman 
throughout  the  trial  of  the  Great  War.  The  Napoleonic 
wars  had  transformed  England,  for  a  time  into  a  military 
nation;  she  was  fighting  in  a  case  of  necessity,  as  she 
is  doing  today,  without  weakness  but  respectful  of  the 
obligations  of  moral  duty.  Her  patriotism,  founded  on 
honour  and  moral  energy,  while  urging  her  to  make 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       271 

supreme  sacrifices,  at  the  same  time  charged  her  to  ob- 
serve, in  the  course  of  the  terrible  struggle,  the  spiritual 
values  which  go  to  make  up  human  dignity.  This  dis- 
tressful period  produced  leaders  like  Nelson  and  Welling- 
ton, who  were  great  men  not  only  because  of  their  military 
genius,  but  also  because  of  their  noble  characters.  Nel- 
son's message  to  the  fleet  at  the  beginning  of  the  battle  of 
Trafalgar  is  not  forgotten  today.  It  may  sound  some- 
what cold  to  us,  but  in  the  case  of  the  English,  it  strikes  a 
deep  chord  capable  of  stirring  men  to  supreme  sacrifice: 
"England  expects  every  man  to  do  his  duty."  It  was  the 
same  chord  that  General  Foch,  one  of  the  great  French- 
men of  today,  succeeded  in  striking,  at  the  side  of  Field- 
Marshall  French,  when  at  the  height  of  the  battle  of 
Ypres  the  English  Army,  near  cut  to  pieces,  was  beginning 
to  waver.  In  the  memorable  interview  between  the  two 
commanders,  our  valorous  compatriot,  while  warranting 
that  the  French  Army  would  not  budge,  had  only  to  make 
an  allusion  to  the  noble  traditions  of  English  constancy 
in  order  to  remove  all  ideas  of  retreat.  French  energy 
and  English  stoicism  came  to  an  understanding;  the  two 
leaders  fell  into  each  other's  arms  and  the  cause  of  the 
Allies  was  saved.  It  is  in  such  tragic  hours  as  these 
that  the  soul  of  a  nation  is  truly  revealed  and  that  lasting 
friendships  are  sealed. 

England  did  not  abandon  herself  with  the  same  confi- 
dence to  the  German  alliance  at  the  time  when  the  Napo- 
leonic peril  obliged  her  to  co-operate  with  the  King  of 
Prussia.  Wellington  had  a  "German  legion"  under  his 
orders  in  1807,  when  he  undertook  the  defence  of  Spain 
against  the  French  invasion.  In  the  correspondence 
which  he  exchanged  with  his  mother  at  that  time  the 
following  passage  is  to  be  found:  "I  can  assure  you  that 
in  this  German  legion  from  the  general  down  to  the 
smallest  drummer,  it's  the  same  thing.  The  earth  has 


272       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

never  groaned  under  the  weight  of  bloodier  and  more 
infamous  rascals.  They  murder,  pillage,  and  ill-treat 
the  peasants  wherever  they  pass.  ..."  This  conduct 
of  the  German  soldiery,  in  a  friendly  country,  plainly 
reveals  the  bottom  of  their  nature.  Nothing  could  be 
further  removed  from  the  spirit  of  rectitude  and  generosity 
of  which  the  English  gave  proof  in  this  war.  And  these 
are  precisely  the  moral  qualities  which  Wordsworth  throws 
into  relief  in  his  portrait  of  the  "Happy  Warrior." 

What  a  distance  there  is  between  the  English  officer, 
imbued  with  the  individualist  ideal  of  respect  for  his  own 
and  others'  personality,  and  the  German  officer  who  is  a 
blind  and  cruel  instrument  of  a  policy  of  plunder  and  a 
pitiless  executor  of  the  doctrine  of  war  by  terror!  The 
poet  represents  his  hero  as  a  man  resolved  to  maintain 
living  within  himself,  under  the  most  difficult  circum- 
stances, the  will  to  rise  constantly  to  higher  levels  of 
nobleness.  .  .  . 

Whose  high  endeavours  are  an  inward  light 
That  make  the  path  before  him  always  bright : 
Who,  with  a  natural  instinct  to  discern 
What  knowledge  can  perform,  is  diligent  to  learn; 
Abides  by  this  resolve,  and  stops  not  there, 
But  makes  his  moral  being  his  prime  care; 
Who,  doomed  to  go  in  company  with  Pain, 
And  Fear,  and  Bloodshed,  miserable  train ! 
Turns  his  necessity  to  glorious  gain; 
In  face  of  these  doth  exercise  a  power 
Which  is  our  human  nature's  highest  dower; 
Controls  them  and  subdues,  transmutes,  bereaves 
Of  their  bad  influence,  and  their  good  receives : 
By  objects,  which  might  force  the  soul  to  abate 
Her  feeling,  rendered  more  compassionate; 
Is  placable — because  occasions  rise 
So  often  that  demand  such  sacrifice; 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       273 

More  skilful  in  self-knowledge,  even  more  pure 
As  tempted  more;  more  able  to  endure, 
As  more  exposed  to  suffering  and  distress; 
Thence,  also,  more  alive  to  tenderness. 
— 'Tis  he  whose  law  is  reason;  who  depends 
Upon  that  law  as  on  the  best  of  friends; 
Whence  in  a  state  where  men  are  tempted  still 
To  evil  for  a  guard  against  worse  ill, 
And  what  in  quality  or  act  is  best 
Doth  seldom  on  a  right  foundation  rest, 
He  labours  good  on  good  to  fix,  and  owes 
To  virtue  every  triumph  that  he  knows. 

This  self-control,  this  tension  of  the  whole  being  with 
a  view  of  persevering,  despite  temptations,  obstacles,  and 
promptings  of  anger,  in  the  direction  of  honour,  reason, 
and  humanity — these  are  the  qualities  of  a  leader,  not 
only  just  and  humane  in  his  own  actions,  but  also  capable 
of  exercising  around  him  the  authority  which  prevents  all 
brutality  and  excess.  There  is  a  long  cry  from  this  to  the 
systematic  barbarity  of  the  German  General  Staff  which 
declares  through  one  of  its  spokesmen,  Julius  von  Hart- 
mann,  General  of  Cavalry:  "Violence  and  Passion,  such 
are  the  two  principal  levers  of  all  warlike  action!"  It  is 
also  far  removed  from  the  official  German  doctrine  as 
expressed  in  the  instructions  from  headquarters  to  officers, 
which  excuses  the  most  revolting  cruelties  (such  as  the 
killing  of  prisoners  or  their  use  as  a  living  rampart)  for 
the  reason  "that  in  war  one  must  act  quickly"  or  (un- 
speakable cynicism)  "that  this  process  has  given  excellent 
results!"  And  a  greater  difference  still  separates  this 
English  ideal  from  the  practice  of  the  German  hordes 
who  not  content  to  kill,  burned  the  wounded  alive  in  a 
barn  as  they  did  at  Longuyon,  or  prevented  the  doctors 
and  nurses  from  dressing  wounds,  as  they  did  during  the 
last  eight  days  of  their  occupation  of  Saint-D'e!  Words- 
is 


274       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

worth's  noble  warrior  is  not  only  humane  in  his  moments 
of  composure,  before  the  battle  or  after  the  action,  he  is 
humane  in  the  very  heat  of  the  fight.  His  chivalrous 
valour  is  incompatible  with  fury  and  cruelty. 

But  who,  if  he  be  called  upon  to  face 

Some  awful  moment  to  which  Heaven  has  joined 

Great  issues,  good  or  bad  for  human  kind, 

Is  happy  as  a  lover;  and  attired 

With  sudden  brightness,  like  a  Man  inspired; 

And,  through  the  heat  of  conflict,  keeps  the  law 

In  calmness  made,  and  sees  what  he  foresaw. 

Thus  in  the  full  tide  of  the  Romantic  movement,  at  a 
time  when  a  wave  of  passion  breaks  over  the  world,  when 
either  a  frenzy  of  excess  or  a  fever  of  ecstasy  is  abroad, 
England,  by  the  voice  of  Wordsworth,  expresses  her 
attachment  to  law  and  duty,  and  professes  her  respect  for 
moderation  and  reason.  She  is  not  insensible  to  what  is 
great  in  Romanticism,  I  mean,  to  its  emotional  power  and 
enthusiasm;  but  she  applies  this  Ban  ad  altiora  to  moral 
idealism.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  English  Romanticism 
frequently  possesses  a  high  civilizing  value.  Even  when, 
under  trans-Rhenan  influences,  it  inclines  towards  Ger- 
manism, it  abandons  neither  its  particular  dignity  nor  its 
particular  generosity. 

Carlyle,  who,  because  of  his  mystical  bent,  felt  himself 
drawn  towards  the  German  transcendentalists,  never 
allowed  himself  as  they  did  to  wander  into  the  error  of 
subjectivism,  either  under  the  form  of  self-exaltation 
or  under  the  form  of  the  deification  of  the  race.  The 
Christian,  or  the  universal  conception  of  morals  and  life 
which  he  owed  to  his  solid  Scotch  education,  opened  his 
mind  to  lights  which  Schleiermacher,  Novalis,  Hegel,  and 
others  failed  to  see  and  to  which  their  compatriots  of 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       275 

today  are  blinded  even  more  than  they  were.  No  one 
has  denounced  with  more  force  than  Carlyle  the  habitual 
vagaries  of  the  ego  which  views  itself  with  complacency 
and  knows  no  other  guide  than  the  mirage  of  dreamland 
and  the  suggestion  of  desire.  Now,  desire  is  from  its 
very  nature  insatiable ;  an  individual  or  a  nation  who  give 
themselves  up  to  desire  condemn  themselves  beforehand 
to  the  disturbances  of  lunacy.  What  a  piquant  and 
cutting  satire  of  romantic — and  Germanic — covetousness 
is  Carlyle's  portrait  of  the  "Shoeblack": 

Will  the  whole  Finance  Ministers  and  Upholsterers  and  Con- 
fectioners of  modern  Europe  undertake  in  joint-stock  company 
to  make  one  Shoeblack  happy?  They  cannot  accomplish  it 
above  an  hour  or  two ;  for  the  Shoeblack  also  has  a  soul  quite 
other  than  his  stomach;  and  would  require,  if  you  consider 
it,  for  his  permanent  satisfaction  and  saturation  simply  this 
allotment,  no  more  and  no  less:  God's  infinite  Universe 
altogether  to  himself,  therein  to  enjoy  infinitely  and  fill  every 
wish  as  fast  as  it  rose.  Oceans  of  Hochheimer,  a  throat  like 
that  of  Ophincus:  speak  not  of  them;  to  the  infinite  Shoeblack, 
they  are  nothing.  No  sooner  is  your  ocean  filled  than  he 
grumbles  that  it  might  have  been  of  better  vintage.  .  . 
(Sartor  Resartus,  chap.  ix.). 

While  Carlyle  did  not  perhaps  appreciate  the  extent  to 
which  Germany — or  at  least  Prussia — was  moving,  even 
in  his  time,  down  the  slope  of  cupidity  and,  because  of  her 
romantic  infatuation  was  inevitably  approaching  a  state 
of  self -deification,  yet  he  was  by  no  means  slow  to  criticize 
his  compatriots  whenever  he  caught  them  wandering, 
as  he  thought,  beyond  the  limits  of  moderation  and 
sobriety. 

Nevertheless,  taken  all  in  all,  Carlyle  understood 
only  very  imperfectly  a  few  of  the  elements  of  the  modern 
spirit.  His  mysticism,  although  enlightened  by  the  idea 


276       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

of  renunciation,  which  he  owed  to  his  Christian  education, 
and  by  the  idea  of  justice,  which  he  owed  to  the  French 
Revolution,  had  a  tendency  to  rely  too  much  upon  feel- 
ing. He  was  wanting  in  that  breadth  of  view  which  is 
the  natural  outcome  of  intellectual  sympathy.  He  was 
so  entirely  absorbed  in  the  contemplation  of  the  moral 
plan  of  life  that  he  neglected  thought.  His  culture  was 
imperfect:  he  disdained  poetry,  was  unacquainted  with 
art,  and  mistrusted  reason.  France  found  little  grace  in 
his  eyes,  because  her  qualities  are  of  an  intellectual  order. 

Contemporary  England  has  outrun  Carlyle.  She  has 
become  more  rationalistic — an  evolution  which  draws  her 
nearer  to  France.  She  has  cured  herself,  to  a  great 
extent,  of  her  insularity — and  that  is  something  which 
brings  her  nearer  to  our  conception  of  humanism.  A 
thinker  and  a  critic  of  the  English  social  organism,  Mat- 
thew Arnold,  who  follows  Carlyle  chronologically  and  who 
perceived  the  latter's  insufficiency,  has  done  a  great  deal  to 
clear  the  intellectual  horizon  of  his  country.  He  was  one 
of  those  men  who  have  understood  the  qualities  of  the 
French  mind  and  who  have  contributed  to  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  union  of  France  and  England  for  the  common 
work  of  European  progress. 

The  son  of  a  prominent  educator,  Thomas  Arnold, 
whose  name  is  celebrated  in  England  for  the  importance 
he  gave  to  moral  development  in  the  schools,  Matthew 
Arnold  was  a  born  moralist.  In  that  he  was  typically 
English.  The  novelty  and  originality  of  his  doctrine 
consisted  in  his  applying  to  humane  culture  the  intensity 
of  religious  zeal  and  the  ardour  for  moral  improvement 
which  had  previously  been  reserved,  almost  exclusively, 
for  the  lessons  drawn  from  the  Bible.  In  his  mind,  the 
Scriptures  still  represented  a  precious  source  of  moral 
truth,  since  they  expressed  with  moving  sincerity  and 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       277 

simple  yet  majestic  poetry  man's  eternal  yearning  after 
love  and  virtue.  But  he  felt  that  the  time-honoured 
insistence  of  the  Puritans  (that  is  of  the  middle-class, 
which  has  become  in  the  nineteenth  century  the  very 
body  of  the  nation)  in  placing  the  Old  Testament  before 
the  New  was  not  without  danger.  He  was  afraid  (what 
has  come  to  pass  in  Germany)  that  the  hardness  of  the 
Old  Law  would  accentuate  the  roughness  of  the  Saxon 
temperament  and  that  the  Hebraism  of  the  prophets 
would  encourage  Germanism  in  its  harsh,  narrow,  and 
inhuman  tendencies.  Furthermore,  was  not  the  Old 
Testament  the  Jewish  law  for  the  exclusive  use  of  the 
Jewish  people,  with  a  decided  shade  of  contempt  for 
the  Gentiles?  And  if  it  be  admitted  that  it  was  one  of 
the  historical  necessities  of  the  political  and  social  develop- 
ment of  Israel,  it  was  no  doubt  an  unfavourable  influence 
in  modern  civilization. 

We  see  only  too  clearly  today,  by  the  example  of  Ger- 
many hypnotized  by  the  worship  of  her  "Ancient  God" — 
a  strange  combination  of  Jehovah  and  Wotan — how 
legitimate  were  the  fears  of  Matthew  Arnold.  He  sought, 
then,  to  give  preference  to  the  New  Testament;  for 
its  characteristics  of  universality  and  humanity  surely 
render  it  worthy  of  becoming  the  true  Evangel  of  the 
fraternity  of  nations.  He  undertook  to  establish  the 
enlightening  value  of  the  teaching  of  Christ  by  pointing 
out  its  place  and  part  in  the  evolution  of  civiliza- 
tion. Christianity,  in  his  view,  represents  the  moral 
force,  the  highest  and  most  effective  impulse  of  the  soul, 
enlightening  and  vivifying  the  intellectual  effort  of  the 
ancient  and  modern  worlds  to  understand  the  Universe 
and  human  nature.  As  a  disciple  of  Plato,  he  believed 
with  his  master,  that  love  must  inspirit  dialectics;  ac- 
quainted with  the  works  of  Pascal,  he  understood  that 
both  the  heart  and  the  head  have  their  assigned  task  in 


278       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

the  search  after  truth  and  as  guides  of  conduct.  His 
doctrine  represented  a  conciliation  of  humanism  and 
Christianity.  Reason,  and  reason  alone,  thought  he, 
surely  cannot  reveal  the  profound  secret  of  things;  for 
beyond  the  science  of  nature,  beyond  history,  and  beyond 
philosophy,  there  exists  faith  in  a  supreme  order,  which  in 
one  of  its  aspects  is  the  law  of  the  mind,  and  without  this 
faith  man  is.  tossed  about  aimlessly  or  falls  headlong  into 
error,  mistaking  his  own  fragile  solutions  for  absolute 
truth  and  mistaking  alas!  his  cupidity  or  ferocity  for  the 
suggestions  of  good.  Nor  is  it  transcendent  imagination 
that,  alone,  can  enlighten  us;  since  the  mysterious  faculty 
of  intuition,  so  precious  and  so  indispensable  as  an  interior 
light  and  as  a  force  of  idealism,  is  after  all  only  a  confused 
yearning  which  does  not  guide  us,  hour  by  hour,  in  presence 
of  pressing  perplexities  varying  with  the  individual,  the 
circumstances,  the  milieu,  and  the  moment.  And  so  the 
source  of  human  wisdom  is  neither  exclusively  reason  nor 
exclusively  imagination,  but  a  combination  of  both,  reason 
illuminated  by  the  flash  of  imagination,  and  imagination 
guided  by  the  prudence  of  reason;  in  other  terms,  this 
source  is  a  natural  faculty  developed  by  effort,  which 
Matthew  Arnold  calls  "imaginative  reason." 

The  labour  of  effort,  reflexion,  knowledge,  such  is  the 
task  which  the  English  moralist  imposes  on  mankind;  at 
the  same  time,  by  the  ardour  of  his  exhortation,  he  reminds 
man  of  the  beauty  of  the  faith  of  Christ  in  infinite  love. 
Knowledge,  he  urges,  does  not  merely  consist  in  the 
pursuit  of  the  laws  of  matter  through  which  the  nine- 
teenth century  unfortunately  tends  to  confine  all  mental 
activity.  He  does  not  disdain  science;  he  recognizes  the 
forces  of  resistance  and  of  creation  which  the  conquest  of 
nature  has  contributed  to  life;  he  is  aware  of  the  precision, 
amplitude,  suppleness,  and  penetration  which  scientific 
laws  and  methods  have  added  to  truth.  Nevertheless, 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       279 

about  1870,  at  the  time  when  he  expounded  his  doctrine 
(which  present  circumstances  would  not  alter),  it  seemed 
to  him  especially  necessary  to  direct  the  intellectual  effort 
of  his  contemporaries  towards  that  particular  form  of 
knowledge  capable  of  nourishing  moral  ideas  and  of  laying 
the  foundation  of  a  firm  and  lofty  conception  of  right. 
Hence  he  recommends  the  study  of  Letters,  Litterce 
humaniores,  those  spiritual  monuments  of  human  thought, 
standing  out  across  the  ages,  selected  by  the  choice  and 
admiration  of  the  best  judges,  tested  by  time  and  magnified 
by  the  piety  attached  to  things  of  the  past.  Matthew 
Arnold  is  an  advocate  of  the  study  of  the  classics,  in 
which  he  sees,  as  we  in  France  do,  the  intellectual  nourish- 
ment pre-eminently  suited  to  the  elite,  through  whom  its 
benefits  are  extended  to  all  ranks  of  the  nation. 

England  has  never  been  deficient  in  the  culture  of  the 
classics.  Matthew  Arnold  himself,  a  former  student  of 
Oxford,  is  well  aware  of  the  honour  in  which  the  great 
men  of  Greece  and  Rome  have  ever  been  held  in  that 
sanctuary  of  noble  thoughts  and  generous  enthusiasms. 
He  proposes,  however,  to  renew  and  to  fortify  the  study 
of  the  classics  by  presenting  them  not  as  mere  depositaries 
of  common  wisdom  but  as  representatives  of  a  stage  of 
human  thought  in  the  course  of  an  incessant  progress 
towards  more  light.  He  recommends  the  historical  and 
rationalist  point  of  view  for  the  formation  and  the  en- 
lightenment of  imaginative  reason.  One  should  extract 
the  essential  thought  contained  in  each  literary  work  or 
epoch  or  form  of  civilization,  point  out  its  defects  and 
shortcomings,  the  profound  causes  of  the  decadence  of 
empires,  and  infuse  new  life  into  each  study  by  adapting 
it  to  the  needs  of  contemporary  thought.  The  teachings 
of  the  great  writers  of  antiquity  should  be  completed  by 
the  teachings  of  the  masters  of  European  thought  who  have 
contributed  to  the  development  of  Occidental  civilization 


280       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

under  the  influence  of  Christianity.  Thus,  from  the 
ancient  and  modern  humanities  combined,  is  evolved  an 
intellectual  ideal  and  a  European  code  of  morals  composed 
of  the  contributions  of  all  epochs  and  of  all  countries  and 
unified  by  man's  powerful  and  indestructible  aspiration 
towards  good.  Such  is  the  ideal  of  "culture,"  rich  in  its 
diversity,  warm  in  its  sympathies,  and  ready  to  welcome 
all  ideas  verified  by  reason,  which  England  and  France 
are  defending  today  against  the  encroachments  of  Kultur 
(that  is  to  say  against  the  German  idea,  which  is  material- 
istic and  mystic,  mechanical  and  despotic,  narrowly  and 
fiercely  national).  Nothing  prevents  this  cosmopolitan 
type  of  culture  from  assuming  a  character  in  keeping  with 
the  mental  complexion,  the  traditions,  and  the  glories 
of  each  particular  people.  For  instance,  while  Matthew 
Arnold  knowingly  leads  English  humanism  towards  the 
moral  interpretation  of  a  masterpiece,  we,  in  France,  are 
naturally  inclined  to  extract  its  intellectual  value,  its 
principles  of  reason,  of  balance,  of  psychological  truth 
and  of  beauty.  But  goodness  and  truth  and  beauty  form 
an  inseparable  trilogy.  Whoever  approaches  the  study 
of  this  trilogy  through  one  of  its  terms,  cannot  fail,  sooner 
or  later,  to  encounter  the  other  two  during  his  progress. 
It,  is  to  this  trilogy  of  supreme  human  value  that  Anglo- 
French  civilization  is  ardently  and  passionately  attached 
— even  to  the  sacrifice  of  life  itself. 

What  we  discover  at  the  base  and  at  the  summit  of 
Matthew  Arnold's  philosophy  is  idealism.  We  find  it 
at  the  base,  since  its  starting-point  is  moral  intuition  and 
that  spiritual  yearning  which  tends  towards  the  perfection 
and  consummation  of  the  soul's  destiny;  we  find  it  at  the 
summit  since  the  goal  of  his  philosophy  is  truth — truth 
varying  with  each  epoch,  adapted  to  new  forms  of  thought 
and  social  organization,  but  essentially  conformable  to 
the  noble  aspirations  of  humanity,  ever  since  civilization 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       281 

has  been  expressed,  for  thirty  centuries  past,  by  the 
voice  of  great  thinkers.  Now,  it  is  also  true  that  Hegel's 
philosophy  makes  use  of  the  name  of  idealism  and  Hegel's 
philosophy  is  the  source  of  contemporary  German  Kultur. 
But  English  idealism  and  German  idealism  are  so  different 
in  nature  that  it  is  important  to  anticipate  any  confusion 
which  might  result  from-  an  identity  of  terms.  Hegel 
defines  his  idealism  realistically,  and  that  is  precisely 
where  the  branching  of  the  roads  takes  place.  For  Hegel, 
the  idea  exists  in  the  mind  only  as  bound  up  with  actual 
facts,  is  conceivable  only  through  tangible  reality  or 
manifests  itself  only  through  the  study  of  those  tendencies 
which  manifest  themselves  in  tangible  reality.  Thereupon 
Teutonic  mysticism  and  national  fanaticism  intervene 
and  the  consequence  is  to  mistake  for  absolute  truth 
what  is  merely  German.  The  idea  of  the  State,  for  ex- 
ample, is  not,  from  Hegel's  standpoint,  a  rational  form  of 
society  the  elements  of  which  would  be  liberty  as  the 
contributive  part  of  the  ancient  Greeks  and  the  English, 
justice  as  the  contributive  part  of  the  French,  and  disci- 
pline as  the  contributive  part  of  the  Germans.  His  idea 
of  the  State  is  the  Prussian  State  deified,  transformed  into 
a  mystic  entity,  enthroned  in  the  Heavens,  whence  it 
imposes  its  principles  of  despotic  authority  and  brutal 
force  on  Germany,  until  ready  to  impose  them  on  the 
world  by  universal  war.  German  idealism,  despite  its 
dialectic  value  and  its  successes  in  minor  points,  results 
in  monstrous  consequences  because  misguided  by  German 
pride,  misled  by  German  ambition,  and  blinded  by  German 
narrowness,  it  stands  aloof  from  humanity  with  naive  and 
perverse  obstinacy. 

Matthew  Arnold  has  devoted  his  great  work  of  criti- 
cism more  especially  to  emphasizing  the  permanent  bene- 
fits of  Greek  thought,  to  tracing  the  general  lines  of 
Goethe's  thought — that  great  German  whose  lessons 


282       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

Germany  is  denying  today — and  to  pointing  out  the  ad- 
vantages which  England  would  derive  from  a  more 
intimate  commerce  with  French  thought.  Matthew 
Arnold  does  not  confine  himself  to  unlimited  praise  of 
France.  He  draws  our  attention  to  certain  truths  which 
we  might  meditate  with  advantage  to  ourselves.  He 
upbraids  us  for  what  he  considers,  to  some  extent,  as  a 
deficiency  in  the  sense  of  conduct.  Not  that  he  believes 
the  French  nation  really  debased;  but  he  recognizes  in 
certain  cases,  particularly  in  the  relations  between  sexes, 
a  certain  looseness  which  he  considers  harmful  to  the 
general  moral  health.  Public  opinion  is  an  accomplice — 
at  least  by  its  silence.  Literature  sometimes  reveals  a 
regrettable  indulgence.  Fortunately  (and  in  this  he  aban- 
dons himself  unreservedly  to  his  sympathy)  taken  as  a 
whole,  the  French  possess  a  delicacy  of  perception  and  a 
sense  of  measure  which  check  them  on  the  slope  of  excess. 
In  the  province  of  the  mind,  these  qualities  become 
incomparable  and  confer  on  the  French  nation,  within  the 
society  of  European  nations,  a  leading  r61e  of  the  highest 
importance  in  the  development  of  civilizing  forces. 

The  French,  says  Matthew  Arnold,  are  worthy  of 
stirring  the  emulation  of  other  peoples  for  the  high  esteem 
in  which  they  hold  ideas.  Thought,  as  cultivated  by 
the  French,  is  universal  thought  which  does  not  belong 
exclusively  to  their  country  nor  to  a  particular  time 
but  which  strives  to  steer  clear  of  national  prejudice  and 
to  embrace  with  ready  comprehension  the  past  and  the 
future  of  humanity.  Thanks  to  its  general  applications, 
to  its  speculative  daring,  to  its  humane  generosity  the 
French  Revolution,  despite  momentary  discredit  due 
to  its  immediate  political  consequences,  has  a  right  to 
sympathetic  attention.  Matthew  Arnold  is  too  English 
not  to  estimate  at  their  full  value  the  English  qualities 
of  practical  sense,  of  traditional  prudence,  and  of  attach- 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       283 

ment  to  the  spirit  of  compromise.  But  he  is  too  en- 
lightened not  to  understand  that  these  traits  of  British 
character  need  to  be  corrected  by  an  infusion  of  certain 
rational  principles  and  stimulated  by  a  leaven  of  logic 
and  intellectual  activity.  He  is  also  too  just  not  to 
observe  that  France  (even  the  France  of  1875)  nad  learned 
much  in  the  school  of  experience;  that  without  disowning 
her  enthusiasm  or  general  ideas,  without  deserting  her 
idealism,  she  had  tempered  her  fundamental  tenets  and 
no  longer  believed  that  abstract  truth  could  be  realized 
entirely  and  immediately  in  the  field  of  fact.  Thanks  to 
the  moderation  introduced  into  these  tenets  by  this  new 
practical  wisdom,  France  has  reached  a  degree  of  social 
development  capable  of  becoming  a  model  for  other 
nations. 

It  is  in  France,  remarked  Matthew  Arnold,  that  the 
distances  between  classes  is  the  least  perceptible;  the 
principle  of  equality,  proclaimed  in  1789,  has  born  its 
fruit.  Not  only  is  France  a  stranger  to  castes,  not  only 
are  the  comforts  of  life  more  equitably  distributed  than 
in  any  other  country,  but  intellectual  culture,  in  France, 
has  sown  a  richer  and  larger  harvest  than  elsewhere. 
France  furnishes  the  admirable  example  of  a  country 
of  which  the  middle-class — that  is  the  great  majority  of 
the  nation — is  truly  cultured  in  the  universal  and  humane 
sense  of  the  word. 

...  .  If  we  consider  the  beauty  and  the  ever-advancing 
perfection  of  Paris, — nay,  and  the  same  holds  good,  in  its 
degree,  of  all  other  great  French  cities  also,  ...  if  we  con- 
sider the  theatre  there,  if  we  consider  the  pleasures,  recrea- 
tions, even  the  eating  and  the  drinking,  if  we  consider  the 
whole  range  of  resources  for  instruction  and  for  delight  and 
for  the  conveniences  of  a  humane  life  generally,  and  then  if  we 
think  of  London,  of  Liverpool,  of  Glascow,  and  of  life  in  the 
English  towns  in  general,  we  shall  find  that  the  advantage  of 


284       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

France  arises  from  its  immense  middle-class  making  the  same 
sort  of  demands  upon  life  which  only  a  small  upper-class  makes 
elsewhere.  ,  .x 


Since  these  lines  were  written,  England  has  begun  to 
improve  in  the  very  direction  earnestly  advocated  by 
Matthew  Arnold.  To  realize  this  equality — no  doubt 
relative — the  effects  of  which,  in  France,  are  so  favourable 
to  refinement,  intellectual  and  artistic  development,  and  to 
sociability,  that  is  to  the  humanizing  of  the  mass  of  the 
nation,  it  was  needful  to  set  up  a  system  of  legislation 
tending  to  limit,  in  the  future,  the  accumulation  of  riches 
in  the  hands  of  a  few,  and,  on  the  contrary,  to  favour 
the  dissemination  of  competence,  and  to  multiply  the 
number  of  small  fortunes.  England  has  entered  upon 
this  reform.  It  was  necessary,  too,  that  secondary  schools 
should  be  founded  for  the  middle-class,  alongside  of  the 
great  aristocratic  schools  like  Harrow  and  Eton,  which, 
for  centuries,  have  dispensed  classical  culture  to  the  sons 
of  the  older  families.  This  reform  also  England  has 
accomplished  or  is  accomplishing.  Matthew  Arnold, 
nominated  Inspector  General  of  Public  Education,  had 
already  visited  our  Lycees  and  gathered  from  them 
certain  precious  suggestions.  One  of  his  successors,  Mr. 
Cloudesley  Brereton,  attended  one  of  our  classes  of 
philosophy  for  a  year  and  is  now  director  of  Secondary 
Education  in  the  department  of  Public  Education  in 
England.  He  is  in  entire  sympathy  with  the  ideas  of 
Matthew  Arnold  and  with  our  French  ideal.  Then  again 
a  certain  number  of  our  Docteurs  Zs  lettres  have  been  made 
professors  of  French  literature  in  British  Universities, 
and  each  year  sees  an  increase  in  the  number  of  English 
students,  future  professors,  who  enroll  in  our  higher 

1  Matthew  Arnold.     Mixed  Essays,  p.  165. 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       285 

institutions  of  learning.  Reciprocally  we  are  sending  to 
England  every  year  a  larger  number  of  our  young  men 
and  women  to  round  out  their  special  English  studies 
and  to  assimilate  the  spirit  ot  the  country,  which,  by  its 
solidity  and  seriousness,  so  happily  completes  the  quickness 
and  elan  of  the  French  mind.  Certain  societies,  such 
as  the  Entente-Cordiale,  the  Franco-English  Guild,  the 
Association  franco-ecossaise  and  our  admirable  Alliance 
Frangaise,  organize  an  exchange  of  visits  and  establish 
currents  of  intellectual  penetration  in  both  senses  by  means 
of  lectures.  The  two  literatures  judge  each  other  recipro- 
cally in  a  more  and  more  equitable  light;  they  are  more 
and  more  inclined  to  borrow  from  each  other  certain 
subjects  and  ideas,  elements  of  true  local  colour,  and 
research  material  for  social  study.  In  short  the  intellect- 
ual union  of  the  two  countries  is  being  brought  about 
through  mutual  knowledge  and  sympathy. 

A  great  writer  of  the  Victorian  period,  the  novelist  and 
poet,  George  Meredith,  has  done  a  great  deal  to  lead  his 
fellow  countrymen  away  from  insularity  towards  the 
broad  and  free  horizon  of  European  Culture.  Meredith 
knew  France  well  and  loved  her  sincerely;  our  logic,  our 
taste  for  rational  clearness,  our  thoughtful  idealism,  in 
particular,  seemed  to  him  worthy  the  emulation  of  the 
English,  just  as  the  French  in  turn  might  find  help  in 
the  moral  steadfastness  and  truthfulness  of  the  latter.  In 
the  cruel  days  of  1870,  when  England,  believing  us  guilty, 
stood  silently  aloof  in  the  hour  of  our  trial,  Meredith 
spoke.  He  wrote  an  ode  To  France  in  which  as  a  true 
friend,  he  took  note  of  the  faults  responsible  for  our 
misfortune  but  at  the  same  time  expressed  his  confidence 
in  the  fundamental  excellence  of  our  qualities.  This 
prophetic  poem,  read  by  our  English  friends  today  as  a 
means  of  tracing  the  vital  sources  of  Anglo-French  sym- 


286       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

pathy,  is  also  worthy  of  being  known  in  France.  The 
pictures  of  war  which  he  evokes  have,  alas,  become  once 
more  events  of  actual  interest.  As  for  the  severity  of  the 
judgments,  we  can  stand  it  since  we  have  learned  to 
criticize  ourselves  most  sharply.  As  for  the  praise  and 
admiration  and  the  faith  in  our  genius,  we  may  accept 
them  with  pride;  they  confirm  our  sentiment  of  piety 
for  the  valour  of  our  race  and  fortify  the  modest  and  sober 
confidence  that  we  have  once  more  placed  in  our  own 
efforts. 

Meredith's  first  word  is  an  expression  of  heartfelt 
sympathy  for  the  misfortune  of  France,  for  the  immense 
void  which  her  fall  has  produced : 

We  look  for  her  that  sunlike  stood 

Upon  the  forehead  of  our  day, 

An  orb  of  nations,  radiating  food 

For  body  and  for  mind  alway. 

Where  is  the  Shape  of  glad  array ; 

The  nervous  hands,  the  front  of  steel, 

The  clarion  tongue?     Where  is  the  bold  proud  face? 

We  see  a  vacant  place; 

We  hear  an  iron  heel.  .  .  . 

Then  after  a  greeting  to  France,  the  evangelist  of  liberty, 
to  the  France  of  philosophy  and  of  the  Revolution,  the 
poet  evokes  a  sombre  vision  of  the  Second  Empire  with 
its  years  of  frivolity,  of  vanity,  and  imprudence: 

O  she  that  made  the  brave  appeal 
For  manhood  when  our  time  was  dark, 
And  from  our  fetters  drove  the  spark 
Which  was  as  lightning  to  reveal 
New  seasons,  with  the  swifter  play 
Of  pulses,  and  benigner  day; 
She  that  divinely  shook  the  dead 
From  living  man;  that  stretched  ahead 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       287 

Her  resolute  forefinger  straight, 

And  marched  toward  the  gloomy  gate 

Of  earth's  Untried,  gave  note,  and  in 

The  good  name  of  Humanity 

Called  forth  the  daring  vision !  she, 

She  likewise  half  corrupt  of  sin, 

Angel  and  Wanton!  can  it  be? 

Her  star  has  foundered  in  eclipse, 

The  shriek  of  madness  on  her  lips; 

Shreds  of  her,  and  no  more,  we  see. 

There  is  horrible  convulsion,  smothered  din, 

As  of  one  that  in  a  grave-cloth  struggles  to  be  free. 

But  France  cannot  die;  indestructible,  she  is  destined 
to  endure  sufferings  which  torture,  but  do  not  kill.  The 
more  intensely  a  nation  is  devoted  to  higher  things,  the 
more  she  feels  offences  against  her  dignity  and  honour 
and  the  cruelty  of  the  conqueror's  brutality.  Such  is  the 
fate  of  France: 

Mother  of  Pride,  her  sanctuary  shamed: 
Mother  of  Delicacy,  and  made  a  mark 
For  outrage:  Mother  of  Luxury,  stripped  stark; 
Mother  of  Heroes,  bondsmen :  thro'  the  rains, 
Across  her  boundaries,  lo  the  league-long  chains ! 
Fond  Mother  of  her  martial  youth ;  they  pass, 
Are  spectres  in  her  sight,  are  mown  as  grass! 
Mother  of  Honour,  and  dishonoured ;  Mother 
Of  Glory,  she  condemned  to  crown  with  bays 
Her  victor,  and  be  fountain  of  his  praise. 

Is  that  all?  Has  France  emptied  to  the  dregs  the  cup 
of  bitterness?  Not  yet.  For  France  knows  and  under- 
stands. She  knows  that  the  acts  of  nations  like  the  acts 
of  individuals  leave  an  aftermath  of  inevitable  conse- 
quence. She  has  been  a  conquering  nation.  But  she 
allowed  fancy  and  caprice  and  love  of  pleasure  to  get  the 


288       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

better  of  her  wisdom.  She  knows  full  well  she  must  pay 
ransom  for  days  of  error.  And  so  it  is  France  herself, 
because  of  her  lucid  intelligence,  who  punishes  France 
most  cruelly. 

Is  there  another  curse?    There  is  another: 

Compassionate  her  madness :  is  she  not 

Mother  of  Reason?  she  that  sees  them  mown 

Like  grass,  her  young  ones!     Yea,  in  the  low  groan 

And  under  the  fixed  thunder  of  this  hour 

Which  holds  the  animate  world  in  one  foul  blot 

Tranced  circumambient  while  relentless  Power 

Beaks  at  her  heart  and  claws  her  limbs  down-thrown, 

She,  with  the  plunging  lightnings  overshot, 

With  madness  for  an  armour  against  pain, 

With  milkless  breasts  for  little  ones  athirst, 

And  round  her  all  her  noblest  dying  in  vain, 

Mother  of  Reason  is  she,  trebly  cursed, 

To  feel,  to  see,  to  justify  the  blow; 

Chamber  to  chamber  of  her  sequent  brain 

Gives  answer  of  the  cause  of  her  great  woe, 

Inexorably  echoing  thro*  the  vaults, 

' 'Tis  thus  they  reap  in  blood,  in  blood  who  sow: 

'This  is  the  sum  of  self -absolved  faults.' 

Doubt  not  that  thro'  her  grief,  with  sight  supreme, 

Thro'  her  delirium  and  despair's  last  dream, 

Thro'  pride,  thro'  bright  illusion  and  the  brood 

Bewildering  of  her  various  Motherhood, 

The  high  strong  light  within  her,  tho'  she  bleeds, 

Traces  the  letters  of  returned  misdeeds. 

She  sees  what  seed  long  sown,  ripened  of  late, 

Bears  this  fierce  crop ;  and  she  discerns  her  fate 

From  origin  to  agony,  and  on 

As  far  as  the  wave  washes  long  and  wan 

Off  one  disastrous  impulse :  for  of  waves 

Our  life  is,  and  our  deeds  are  pregnant  graves 

Blown  rolling  to  the  sunset  from  the  dawn 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       289 

The  chastisement  is  cruel,  but  it  is  fruitful.  From  pain 
bravely  supported,  from  suffering  accepted  because  its 
causes  are  understood,  is  born  regeneration.  France 
will  rise  again ;  her  past  proclaims  it  and  her  reconquered 
virtue  gives  assurance  of  this  renaissance. 

.    .    .  the  Gods  alone 
Remember  everlastingly:  they  strike 
Remorselessly  .    .    . 

.    .    .   And  the  painful  Gods  might  weep, 
If  ever  rain  of  tears  came  out  of  heaven. 
Viewing  the  woe  of  this  Immortal.  .  .  . 

Behold,  the  Gods  are  with  her,  and  are  known. 

Whom  they  abandon  misery  persecutes 

No  more :  them  half-eyed  apathy  may  loan 

The  happiness  of  pitiable  brutes. 

Whom  the  just  Gods  abandon  have  no  light, 

No  ruthless  light  of  introspective  eyes 

That  in  the  midst  of  misery  scrutinize 

The  heart  and  its  iniquities  outright. 

And  so  goes  out  the  soul.     But  not  of  France. 

She  snatched  at  heaven's  flame  of  old, 

And  kindled  nations :  she  was  weak : 

Frail  sister  of  her  heroic  prototype, 

The  Man;  for  sacrifice  unripe, 

She  too  must  fill  a  Vulture's  beak, 

Deride  the  vanquished,  and  acclaim 

The  conqueror,  who  stains  her  fame, 

Still  the  Gods  love  her,  for  that  of  high  aim 

Is  this  good  France,  the  bleeding  thing  they  stripe. 

They  lie  like  circle-strewn  soaked  Autumn-leaves 
Which  stain  the  forest  scarlet,  her  fair  sons! 
19 


290       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

And  of  their  death  her  life  is ;  of  their  blood 
From  many  streams  now  urging  to  a  flood, 
No  more  divided,  France  shall  rise  afresh. 

Immortal  Mother  of  a  mortal  host ! 
Thou  suffering  of  the  wounds  that  will  not  slay, 
Wounds  that  bring  death  but  take  not  life  away ! — 
Stand  fast  and  hearken  while  thy  victors  boast : 

Do  thou  stoop  to  these  graves  here  scattered  wide 
Along  thy  fields,  as  sunless  billows  roll ; 
These  ashes  have  the  lesson  for  the  soul. 
'  Die  to  thy  Vanity,  and  strain  thy  Pride, 
Strip  off  thy  Luxury :  that  thou  may'st  live, 
Die  to  thyself,'  they  say,  'as  we  have  died 

Nor  pray  for  aught  save  in  our  little  space 

To  warn  good  seed  to  greet  the  fair  earth's  face.' 

0  Mother!  take  their  counsel,  and  so  shall 

The  broader  world  breathe  in  on  this  thy  home, 

Light  clear  for  thee  the  counter-changing  dome, 

Strength  give  thee,  like  an  ocean's  vast  expanse 

Off  mountain  cliffs,  the  generations  all, 

Not  whirling  in  their  narrow  rings  of  foam, 

But  as  a  river  forward.     Soaring  France ! 

Now  is  Humanity  on  trial  in  thee : 

Now  may'st  thou  gather  humankind  in  fee : 

Now  prove  that  Reason  is  a  quenchless  scroll ; 

Make  of  calamity  thine  aureole, 

And  bleeding  head  us  thro'  the  troubles  of  the  sea. 

The  confidence,  expressed  with  so  much  nobility,  in 
the  force  of  resurrection  and  unfailing  genius  of  France, 
honours  its  author  as  well  as  those  to  whom  it  is  ad- 
dressed. In  Meredith's  beautiful  poem,  French  and 
English  idealism  reaches  a  common  understanding  for  the 
honour  of  the  two  nations  and  the  honour  of  humanity. 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       291 

These  noble  words  are  as  real  today  as  they  were  forty- 
five  years  ago;  they  symbolize  the  intimate  union  of  two 
great  civilizing  peoples  in  an  effort  to  forward  the  great 
work  of  progress,  of  spiritual  dignity  and  peace. 

Expressions  of  sympathy  for  France  have  been  many 
since  the  Entente  Cordiale  has  removed  the  conflict  of 
interests  and  eliminated  the  misunderstandings  which 
divided  England  and  France.  Among  the  many  signs 
of  esteem  and  friendship  which  have  come  to  light  in 
the  literature  or  press,  I  shall  choose  the  most  signifi- 
cant and  the  most  beautiful:  the  poem  published  by 
Rudyard  Kipling  in  the  Morning  Post  of  June  24,  1913. 

Kipling  is  little  known  in  France  as  a  poet.  His 
vigorous  lines,  strongly  coloured  and  of  a  boldly  marked 
rhythmical  design,  are  written  in  a  language  drawn  from 
the  pure  sources  of  the  Saxon  element,  and  for  that  reason 
little  accessible  to  the  foreign  reader.  The  translation 
of  this  poem  has  not  been  attempted,  probably  because 
the  French  version  without  the  idiomatic  savour  of  the 
terms  and  the  lyric  swing  of  the  metre  would  lose  the 
strong  accent  of  the  original.  It  is  none  the  less  true  that 
Kipling  is  the  greatest  contemporary  poet  of  England. 

Interpreter,  in  his  poetry  and  short  stories,  of  English 
patriotism,  at  a  time  when  a  crisis  of  imperialism,  a  few 
years  before  the  Transvaal  expedition,  rendered  national 
spirit  passionate  in  character,  Kipling  has  celebrated  the 
courage  and  care-free  spirit,  the  daring  and  cheerfulness 
of  the  British  soldier  and  sailor.  Going  back  to  the  past 
of  the  race,  he  has  associated  the  bold  exploits  of  the 
gentlemen  of  Elizabeth's  time  with  the  spirit  of  initiative 
and  sacrifice  which  nowadays  guides  and  upholds  the 
pioneers  of  colonial  conquest.  In  our  own  time  as  in 
past  centuries,  the  Englishman  who  fights  for  the  expan- 
sion of  the  Empire  is  actuated  not  only  by  a  violent  desire 


292       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

for  action,  but  also  by  the  magic  mirage  of  stirring  ad- 
ventures and  distant  horizons;  and  so  Kipling  has  inter- 
preted the  English  dream-world.  The  administrator 
and  the  colonist  follow  on  the  footsteps  of  the  soldier. 
Both  devote  themselves  to  their  task  with  a  deep  feeling 
of  the  moral  obligations  dictated  by  the  law  of  honour, 
of  righteousness  and  justice.  And  so  Kipling  has  poetized 
the  English  sense  of  duty. 

The  events  of  1900  and  1904,  followed  by  the  reconcilia- 
tion with  France  and  by  the  appeasement  of  the  violent 
and  aggressive  sides  of  British  patriotism,  were  a  surprise 
to  Kipling.  He  had  to  think  over  matters  for  some 
years  before  finding  his  bearings.  But  there  were  enough 
poise,  self-control,  and  true  humanity  in  his  creed  of 
heroism  to  bring  him  to  an  understanding  of  the  greatness 
of  the  task  imposed  on  England  by  the  unquenchable 
ambition  of  Germany.  He,  the  poet  of  English  military 
honour,  was  well  qualified  to  understand  the  nation  most 
nobly  obedient  to  the  laws  of  honour  in  her  severe  struggle 
against  Europe  and  so  often  against  England.  When 
Kipling,  after  a  long  silence,  took  up  his  pen  again,  it  was 
to  express  the  esteem  in  which  he  had  learned  to  hold 
France. 

In  their  conflicts  of  former  times,  the  two  enemies  of 
bygone  days  have  given  proof  of  sufficient'  respect  for 
human  dignity,  for  themselves,  and  for  their  opponents, 
to  be  able,  when  their  quarrel  was  over,  to  seal  a  loyal 
friendship.  The  reconciliation  of  the  French  and  English 
is  all  the  more  sincere  because  they  have  acted  straight- 
forwardly in  their  contests.  The  very  resistance  of  which 
they  have  given  proof  without  duplicity  or  meanness 
has  seasoned  them  for  the  national  trials  which  the  future 
holds  in  store  for  them.  A  great,  common  danger  is 
threatening  on  the  horizon;  let  them  unite  their  valour 
and  rectitude  to  safeguard  their  existence  and  the  peace 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       293 

of  the  world.  Such  is  the  theme  of  the  noble  ode  To 
France.  The  loftiness  of  the  subject  gives  gravity  to  the 
inspiration,  eloquent  fulness  to  the  style,  harmonious 
and  sustained  cadence  to  the  verse. 


TO   FRANCE 

Broke  to  every  known  mischance,  lifted  over  all 

By  the  light  sane  joy  of  life,  the  buckler  of  the  Gaul, 

Furious  in  luxury,  merciless  in  toil, 

Terrible  with  strength  that  draws  from  tireless  soil, 

Strictest  Judge  of  her  own  worth,  gentlest  of  man's  mind, 

First  to  follow  Truth  and'  last  to  leave  old  truths  behind, — 

France,  beloved  of  every  soul  that  loves  its  fellow-kind ! 

Ere  our  birth  (rememberest  thou?)  side  by  side  we  lay 

Fretting  in  the  womb  of  Rome  to  begin  our  fray. 

Ere  men  knew  our  tongues  apart,  our  one  task  was  known — 

Each  must  mould  the  other's  fate  as  he  wrought  his  own. 

To  this  end  we  stirred  mankind  till  all  Earth  was  ours, 

Till  our  world-end  stripes  begat  wayside  thrones  and  powers, 

Puppets  that  we  made  or  broke  to  bar  the  other's  path — 

Necessary,  outpost  folk,  hirelings  of  our  wrath. 

To  this  end  we  stormed  the  seas,  tack  for  tack,  and  burst 

Through  the  doorways  of  new  world,  doubtful  which  was  first, 

Hand  on  hilt  (rememberest  thou  ?)  ready  for  the  blow, 

Sure,  whatever  else  we  met,  we  should  meet  our  foe; 

Spurred  or  baulked  at  every  stride  by  the  other's  strength. 

So  we  rode  the  ages  down  and  every  ocean's  length. 

» 

Where  did  you  refrain  from  us  or  we  refrain  from  you? 
Ask  the  wave  that  has  not  watched  war  between  us  two. 
Others  held  us  for  a  while,  but  with  weaker  charms ; 
These  we  quitted  at  the  call  for  each  other's  arms. 
Eager  toward  the  known  delight,  equally  we  strove, 
Each  the  other's  mystery,  terror,  need,  and  love. 


294       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

To  each  other's  open  court  with  our  proofs  we  came. 
Where  could  we  find  honour  else  or  men  to  test  our  claim! 
From  each  other's  throat  we  wrenched,  valour's  last  reward, 
That  extorted  word  of  praise  gasped  'twixt  lunge  and  guard. 
In  each  other's  cup  we  poured  mingled  blood  and  tears, 
Brutal  joys,  unmeasured  hopes,  intolerable  fears, 
All  that  soiled  or  salted  life  for  a  thousand  years. 
Proved  beyond  the  need  of  proof,  matched  in  every  clime, 
O  companion,  we  have  lived  greatly  through  all  time. 

Yoked  in  knowledge  and  remorse,  now  we  come  to  rest, ' 

Laughing  at  old  villainies  that  Time  has  turned  to  jest; 

Pardoning  old  necessity  no  pardon  can  efface — 

That  undying  sin  we  shared  in  Rouen  market-place. 

Now  we  watch  the  new  years  shape,  wondering  if  they  hold 

Fiercer  lightnings  in  their  hearts  than  we  launched  of  old. 

Now  we  hear  new  voices  rise,  question,  boast,  or  gird, 

As  we  raged  (rememberest  thou  ?)  when  our  crowds  were  stirred. 

Now  we  count  new  keels  afloat,  and  new  hosts  on  land, 

Massed  like  ours  (rememberest  thou?)  when  our  strokes  were 

planned. 

We  were  schooled  for  dear  life's  sake,  to  know  each  other's  blade. 
What  can  blood  and  iron  make  more  than  we  have  made? 
We  have  learned  by  keenest  use  to  know  each  other's  mind. 
What  shall  blood  and  iron  loose  that  we  cannot  bind? 
We  who  swept  each  other's  coast,  sacked  each  other's  home, 
vSince  the  sword  of  Brennus  clashed  on  the  scales  of  Rome, 
Listen,  count,  and  close  again,  wheeling  girth  to  girth, 
In  the  linked  and  steadfast  guard  set  for  peace  on  earth. 

Broke  to  every  known  mischance,  lifted  over  all 

By  the  light  sane  joy  of  life,  the  buckler  of  the  Gaul, 

Furious  in  luxury,  merciless  in  toil, 

Terrible  with  strength  that  draws  from  tireless  soil, 

Strictest  judge  of  her  own  worth,  gentlest  of  man's  mind, 

First  to  follow  Truth  and  last  to  leave  old  truths  behind, — 

France,  beloved  of  every  soul  that  loves  its  fellow-kind ! 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       295 

England  has  shown  some  reluctance  in  the  past  in  re- 
cognizing the  value  of  our  rational  idealism  with  its  marks 
of  generous  daring  and  universality.  Being  herself  at- 
tached to  facts,  traditions,  and  to  compromise  which 
every-day  reality  imposes,  she  was  not  without  suspicion 
with  regard  to  a  system  of  thought  which  transcends 
facts,  outruns  experiences,  and  disdains  the  dulness  of 
circumspect  action.  The  French  Revolution  with  its 
disorders  and  the  Napoleonic  era  with  its  ambition  for 
conquest  had  put  her  on  guard  against  abstract  speculation 
which  captivates  the  mind,  but  which,  if  yielded  to  without 
restraint,  leads  enthusiasm  astray.  The  fluctuations  of 
our  political  history  from  the  Restoration  to  the  Second 
Empire,  the  tumultuous  demonstrations  of  the  crowd,  and 
the  imprudent  blundering  of  those  in  power  disposed 
her  to  hold  fast  to  the  severe  opinion  which  Burke  had 
formed  of  us. 

Since  1870,  England  has  seen  France  acquire  an  ever 
clearer  sense  of  reality  and  apply  herself  to  the  great 
work  of  moral  and  material  upbuilding  with  a  persever- 
ance and  thoughtfulness  which  have  surprised  the  world. 
The  Third  Republic  has  continued  to  progress  towards 
stability;  the  direction  of  our  foreign  policy  has  greatly 
strengthened  the  confidence  of  our  friends  and  the  whole- 
some respect  of  our  enemies;  our  colonial  administration 
has  shown  us  to  be  leaders  of  men;  our  financial  system 
is,  with  the  English  system,  among  the  most  solid  in 
existence;  our  army  has  proved  to  be  the  great  instrument 
of  resistance  against  the  aggression  of  the  Barbarians. 
Our  national  character  has  matured ;  we  have  learned  how 
to  organize  our  political  parties  with  a  view  to  an  effective 
programme;  we  are  less  emotional,  less  changeable,  less 
apt  to  disorderly  explosions;  the  spirit  of  association,  a 
corollary  and  mainstay  of  the  spirit  of  liberty,  has  been 
constantly  and  beneficially  developed  in  all  branches  of 


296       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

our   activity.     It   is   this   progress   and   these   successes 
which  have  impressed  the  English. 

Their  esteem  for  us  is  not  one  of  the  least  important 
reasons  which  has  induced  them  to  favour  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  the  Entente  Cordiale.  Seeing  that  we  are  capable 
of  tempering  our  principles  and  of  disciplining  our  enthu- 
siasm, they  have  learned  to  appreciate  our  idealism  at  its 
real  value.  In  it  they  now  see  a  happy  complement  of 
British  practicality.  The  German  savage  materialism  has 
finally  led  them  to  understand,  by  antithesis,  that  our 
creed  of  abstract  truth  is  the  living  ferment  which  pre- 
vents realism  from  degenerating  into  ruthless  greed. 
In  the  field  of  ideas,  henceforth,  they  and  we  may  join 
hands.  Mr.  Glutton  Brock  has  expressed  this  thought 
with  eloquent  sympathy  in  a  famous  article  of  the  Times 
which  we  have  the  right  to  consider  as  the  intellectual 
manifesto  of  English  friendship. z 

Among  all  the  sorrows  of  this  war,  there  is  one  joy  for 
us  in  it:  that  it  has  made  us  brothers  with  the  French  as  no 
two  nations  have  ever  been  brothers  before.  There  has  come 
to  us  after  ages  of  conflict,  a  kind  of  millennium  of  friendship; 
and  in  that  we  feel  there  is  a  hope  for  the  world  that  outweighs 
all  our  fears,  even  at  the  height  of  the  world-wide  calamity. 
.  .  .  Behind  all  the  misunderstandings,  and  in  spite  of  the 
differences  of  character  between  us,  there  was  always  an  under- 
standing which  showed  itself  in  the  courtesies  of  Fontenoy 
and  a  hundred  other  battles.  When  Sir  Philip  Sidney  spoke  of 
France  as  ' '  that  sweet  enemy, ' '  he  made  a  phrase  for  the  English 
feeling  of  centuries  past  and  centuries  to  be.  .  .  .  We  said  that 
the  French  were  frivolous,  and  they  said  that  we  were  gloomy. 
Now  they  see  the  gaiety  of  our  -soldiers,  and  we  see  the  deep 
seriousness  of  all  France  at  this  crisis  of  her  fate.  .  .  . 

1  Literary  Supplement  of  the  Times,  October  i,  1914.  The  Recteur 
of  the  University  of  Paris  specified  that  the  translation  of  this  "Address  to 
France"  should  be  read  in  all  Lyce'es. 


England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature       297 

Now  we  feel  that  France  is  fighting  not  merely  for  her  own 
honour  and  her  own  beautiful  country,  still  less  for  a  triumph 
over  an  arrogant  rival,  but  for  what  she  means  to  all  the 
world;  and  that  now  she  means  far  more  than  ever  in  the  past. 
.  .  .  The  Germans  believe  that  they  have  determined  all  the 
conditions  of  modern  war,  and,  indeed,  of  all  modern  competi- 
tion between  the  nations,  to  suit  their  own  character.  It  is 
their  age,  they  think,  an  age  in  which  the  qualities  of  the  old 
peoples,  England  and  France,  are  obsolete.  They  make 
war  after  their  own  pattern,  and  we  have  only  to  suffer  it 
as  long  as  we  can.  But  France  has  learned  what  she  needs 
from  Germany,  so  that  she  may  fight  the  German  idea  as  well 
as  the  German  armies;  and  when  the  German  armies  were 
checked_before  Paris  there  was  an  equal  check  to  the  German 
idea. 

Then  the  world,  which  was  holding  its  breath,  knew  that 
the  old  nations,  the  old  faith  and  mind  and  conscience  of 
Europe  were  still  standing  fast  and  that  science  had  not  utterly 
betrayed  them  all  to  the  new  barbarism.  Twice  before,  at 
Poitiers  and  in  the  Catalaunian  fields,  there  had  been  such  a 
fight  upon  the  soil  of  France,  and  now  for  the  third  time  it  is 
the  heavy  fate  and  the  glory  of  France  to  be  the  guardian 
nation.  That  is  not  an  accident;  for  France  is  still  the  chief 
treasury  of  all  that  these  conscious  barbarians  would  destroy. 
They  know  that  while  she  stands  unbroken,  there  is  a  spirit 
in  her  that  will  make  their  Kultur  seem  unlovely  to  all  the 
world.  They  know  that  in  her,  as  in  Athens  long  ago,  thought 
remains  passionate  and  disinterested  and  free.  Their  thought 
is  German  and  exercised  for  German  ends  like  their  army; 
but  hers  can  forget  France  in  the  universe,  and  for  that  reason 
her  armies  and  ours  will  fight  for  it  as  if  the  universe  was  at 
stake.  .  .  .  Whatever  wounds  France  suffers  now,  she  is 
suffering  for  all  mankind;  and  now,  more  than  ever  before  in 
her  history,  are  those  words  become  true  which  one  poet  who 
loved  her  gave  to  her  in  the  Litany  of  Nations  crying  to  the  earth : 

"I  am  she  that  was  thy  sign  and  standard-bearer, 
Thy  voice  and  cry; 


298       England's  Spirit  in  her  Literature 

She  that  washed  thee  with  her  blood  and  left  thee  fairer, 

The  same  am  I. 
Were  not  these  the  hands  that  raised  thee  fallen  and  fed  thee, 

These  hands  defiled? 
Was  not  I  thy  tongue  that  spake,  thine  eye  that  led  thee, 

Not  I  thy  child?"1 

This  eloquent  eulogy  gives  us  the  best  of  reasons  to 
hope  that  the  Franco-British  co-operation  is  henceforth 
established  on  solid  foundations  with  a  view  to  the  definite 
triumph  of  the  civilizing  forces  created  in  the  course  of 
ten  centuries  of  history  on  the  banks  of  the  Thames  and 
the  borders  of  the  Seine.  England  brings  a  measured, 
well-disciplined,  solidly  realistic,  and  highly  humane 
conception  of  liberty  and  civic  duty;  France  offers  her 
lofty,  generous,  and  imperishable  ideal  of  inalienable  right 
and  eternal  justice. 

1  Swinburne,  The  Litany  of  Nations. 


CHAPTER  XI 

Conclusion-.      WHat   tHe    EnglisK   Have   Done 
and  wHat  tHey  are  Doing. 

1HAVE  set  forth  the  latent  causes  of  the  conflict  which 
set  Germany — a  nation  of  prey,  hungry  for  colonies, 
seacoasts,  naval  bases,  and  supremacy — against  Eng- 
land, an  old  imperial  nation,  mother  of  commerce  and 
mistress  of  the  seas.  I  have  pointed  out  the  secret  causes 
of  an  ever-widening  abyss  existing  between  these  two 
countries.  Germany  allowed  herself  to  be  blinded  by  an 
unprecedented  development  of  her  material  riches,  and, 
after  having  organized  a  terrible  war-machine  at  the 
expense  of  the  destruction  of  liberty  and  the  individual 
conscience,  cynically  evoked  the  right  of  force.  England, 
on  the  other  hand,  being  too  confident,  perhaps,  in  her 
security,  lived  in  the  hope  of  peaceful  progress,  and 
faithful  to  her  secular  traditions,  cultivated  this  very 
liberty  and  individualism  and,  finally,  having  been  won 
over  to  ideas  of  duty  and  humanity,  sought  to  civilize 
weaker  peoples,  to  extend  parliamentary  liberty  to  all 
English-speaking  groups,  and  to  live  with  her  European 
neighbours  on  a  footing  of  good  understanding,  of  mutual 
concession  and  sympathy.  In  keeping  with  the  concilia- 
tory tendency  of  her  foreign  policy,  England  did  her  ut- 
most up  to  the  very  last  moment  to  maintain  peace.  In 
keeping  with  her  sense  of  right,  with  her  respect  for  inter- 

299 


300    Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English 

national  probity,  with  her  concern  for  the  balance  of 
power  in  Europe,  she  resolved  to  go  to  war  only  when  she 
could  no  longer  entertain  doubts  as  to  the  danger  which 
threatened  her  and  threatened  civilization.  Since  the  mo- 
mentous evening  of  August  the  fourth,  1914,  the  Franco- 
English  Alliance  has  been  consummated  and  is  becoming 
day  by  day  more  effective.  The  question  naturally  arises 
what  have  the  English  done?  what  are  they  doing?  what 
will  they  continue  to  do? 

During  three  tragic  days,  from  the  hour  of  Germany's 
declaration  of  war  against  France  up  to  the  odious  viola- 
tion of  Belgian  soil,  England  left  France  in  painful  uncer- 
tainty as  to  her  intentions.  Despite  the  urgent  appeal  of 
the  head  of  the  French  Government  to  the  British  Prime 
Minister,  despite  the  personal  intervention  of  M.  Poincare 
with  King  George,  England  withheld  her  decision.  Later, 
when  it  became  evident  that  to  the  formidable  industrial 
development  of  Germany,  it  was  necessary  to  oppose  the 
industrialization  of  all  the  resources  of  the  Allies  for  the 
purpose  of  war,  England  was  slower  than  we  in  applying 
herself  without  reserve  to  the  intensified  manufacture  of 
cannon  and  munitions.  Still  later,  when  the  resisting 
force  of  our  enemies,  sheltered  by  underground  defences, 
proved  that  to  dislodge  them  it  would  be  necessary  to 
attack  with  an  increasing  mass  of  battalions  fed  by  fresh 
reserves,  England  hesitated  at  first  to  adopt  the  measures 
destined  to  allow  her  to  lend  us  the  assistance  of  all  her 
men  fit  for  service. 

Yet  after  all,  every  decision  that  the  situation  necessi- 
tated and  that  we  expected  of  her,  was  finally  taken  with  a 
loyalty  and  devotion  to  the  common  cause  which  those 
who  know  her  have  never  doubted,  even  in  the  hours 
when  the  facts  seemed  to  speak  against  her.  How  then 
is  it  possible  to  explain  this  waiting,  these  half -measures, 
this  caution  with  regard  to  those  who  hesitated  or  were 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English    301 

refractory,  and  this  general  timidity  in  the  matter  of 
prejudices,  interests,  and  obstacles? 

From  what  we  know  of  the  moulding  forces  of  English 
history,  of  the  national  character  and  the  spirit  of  the 
institutions,  it  is  difficult  to  admit  on  the  part  of  the 
leaders  and  ruling  classes,  any  indifference,  or  weakness, 
or  lack  of  duty.  Conditions  peculiar  to  England,  certain 
traits  of  the  psychology  of  her  people,  certain  habits  be- 
come an  integral  part  of  her  life,  and  a  certain  acuteness 
of  the  social  question  created  a  situation  which  demanded 
on  the  part  of  the  responsible  heads  prudence  united  to 
decision,  and  suppleness  joined  to  firmness.  The  know- 
ledge of  this  state  of  things  will  explain  the  attitude  of 
the  Government,  the  necessary  graduation  of  measures  of 
exception,  and — as  an  inevitable  consequence — the  rela- 
tive slowness  in  the  initiation  of  all  the  productive  and 
fighting  forces  of  the  country.  This  knowledge  will  dispel 
the  doubts  which  certain  severe  critics  (having  in  mind 
the  immense  sacrifices  of  France)  have  formed;  it  will 
also  permit  us  to  appreciate,  to  its  full  extent  and  value, 
the  powerful  effort  of  Great  Britain. 

The  English  people  were  fortunate  enough  during  the" 
nineteenth  century  not  to  see  their  history  darkened  by  a 
grievous  disaster  like  the  crisis  of  1870  which  put  into  the 
hearts  of  the  French  bitterness  and  suffering  and  lasting 
aversion  for  an  ever-dangerous,  unjust,  covetous,  and 
brutal  neighbour.  England  was  living  without  cruel 
recollections,  without  disquieting  apprehensions  and 
unpleasant  emotions.  Safe  in  her  island  behind  the  shelter 
of  her  fleet,  she  gave  herself  up  without  reserve  to  com- 
mercial and  industrial  activity  and  to  the  task  of  organiz- 
ing her  Empire.  The  people  were  but  little  interested  in 
European  politics.  They  contemplated  somewhat  dis- 
tantly the  rivalries  of  the  "continent"  as  distant  events 


302     Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English 

capable  of  exciting  their  sympathy  or  disapproval  but  not 
of  affecting  them  in  their  deeper  feelings.  Guaranteed  by 
their  isolation,  they  knew  little  of  war  outside  of  colonial 
expeditions,  limited  in  scope,  without  serious  effect  on  the 
country's  internal  life  and  conducted  by  a  professional 
army.  During  the  last  fifteen  years,  while  still  under  the 
shock  of  the  mishaps  of  the  Transvaal  War,  they  thought 
of  nothing  else  but  peace,  being  determined  to  devote  all 
their  energies  to  the  solution  of  internal  problems,  which 
the  recent  demands  of  the  wage-earners  and  proletariat 
rendered  more  urgent  and  complex.  Three  generations 
of  men,  in  the  happy  island  of  Albion,  had  escaped  the 
alarms  and  horrors  of  war;  the  last  generation,  in  its 
military  enterprise  of  South  Africa,  had  promised  itself 
not  to  be  responsible  for  letting  loose  the  dogs  of  war. 
The  German  peril,  of  which  well-advised  statesmen  and 
thoughtful  men  perceived  the  imminent  and  dangerous 
reality,  did  not  trouble  the  masses.  The  representatives 
of  democracy  (who  made  it  their  business  to  reflect 
the  opinions  of  their  constituents)  frowned  on  the  idea  of 
preparation  for  war,  being  satisfied  to  secure  the  tradi- 
tional increase  of  the  fleet  and  the  means  of  sea  defence. 
Both  the  Radical  Party  and  the  Labour  Party  were  pacific. 
The  European  war  suddenly  exploding  in  the  midst  of 
this  calm,  due  to  the  tranquil  confidence  of  some  and  the 
militant  optimism  of  others,  resounded  like  a  thunderclap 
in  a  serene  sky.  Those  who  had  control  of  the  country's 
destinies,  recovered  quickly  and  grappled  with  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  hour  with  clear  and  firm  resolve.  I  do  not 
doubt  that  the  Government,  as  soon  as  Germany  refused 
to  co-operate  in  a  European  Congress,  became  aware  of  the 
full  extent  of  its  duty.  The  people,  however,  were  not 
prepared  to  accept  the  idea  of  war:  it  was  necessary  to 
wait  until  a  flagrant  breach  of  faith  and  a  direct  attack 
on  the  security  of  England  should  open  the  eyes  of  the 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English    303 

nation.  The  invasion  of  Belgium  was  this  act.  Twenty- 
four  hours  after  the  refusal  of  Germany  to  reply  to  the 
English  summons,  Sir  Edward  Grey  launched  a  declaration 
of  war;  he  was  unable  to  do  so  before. 

The  reasons  which  explain  the  delay  of  England  from  the 
first  to  the  fourth  of  August,  1914,  also  explain  her  relative 
slowness  to  enter  the  struggle  body  and  soul,  in  sacrificing 
her  peace-time  habits,  her  insular  placidity,  and  her  love 
for  individualism  and  liberty.  She  needed  ten  months 
to  get  to  the  point  of  directing  all  the  power  of  her  in- 
dustrial production  towards  the  manufacture  of  war 
material;  one  year,  before  she  thought  of  taking  pre- 
cautionary measures  against  the  numerous  Germans 
doing  the  work  of  spies  and  leaders  of  revolt  on  her  soil; 
twenty-two  months,  before  making  up  her  mind  to  apply 
conscription  in  the  recruiting  of  the  army.  Meanwhile, 
during  the  first  weeks,  France  had  mobilized  all  her  civil 
population ;  their  heroic  constancy  barred  and  held  the  tor- 
rent of  attack.  Invaded,  decimated,  and  sorely  wounded, 
she  stiffened  her  resistance  in  an  admirable  effort  of 
will,  of  intelligent  initiative  and  sacrifice,  to  rival  her 
terrible  enemy  in  the  intensive  manufacture  of  arms 
and  munitions.  Could  England  have  followed  her 
example  more  promptly?  The  point  is  controvertible 
and  can  only  be  solved  in  the  full  light  of  history.  What 
is  certain  is  the  fact  that  the  English  Government  had 
serious  difficulties  to  surmount.  It  had  to  be  cautious 
with  the  people,  who  from  the  beginning  were  not  ready 
for  any  supreme  decision.  Precipitation  might  have 
imperilled  everything.  By  cautious  dealing,  by  prudence, 
and  by  gradual  preparation  for  certain  measures  of  de- 
cisive gravity,  the  cabinet  has,  no  doubt,  prevented  a 
catastrophe.  The  English  temperament,  the  state  of 
public  opinion,  and  the  nature  of  popular  habits  and  cus- 
toms justifies  this  point  of  view. 


304    Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English 

The  Englishman  is  slow  to  imagine.  He  does  not 
foresee  with  sufficient  quickness  the  possible  consequences 
of  facts;  he  does  not  react  instantly  and  ardently  in  con- 
tact with  difficulties  as  the  impetuous  and  sensitive 
Frenchman  does.  The  Englishman  must  have  the 
tangible  perception  of  real  things  and  the  massive  shock  of 
powerful  emotions  before  the  equipoise  of  his  sensitiveness 
is  overturned.  His  motto  is:  Wait  and  see  what  is 
coming.  His  force  does  not  consist  in  the  sudden  tension 
of  the  will  and  muscles  which  produce  a  vigorous  impulse 
but  in  long  resistance  and  tenacity.  His  legendary  cool- 
ness is  the  faculty  of  conserving  the  regular  rhythm  of  his 
life  when  under  trial,  in  times  of  crisis  and  in  face  of 
danger.  As  an  individual,  he  keeps  up,  in  the  most 
perilous  situation  the  quiet  movement  of  his  daily  life; 
as  a  unit  of  the  whole  people,  he  follows  tradition  even 
when  circumstances  upset  everything  round  him.  The 
English  soldier,  in  the  trenches  of  Flanders,  finishes 
dressing  himself  under  bombardment  or  takes  the  time 
to  swallow  the  last  slice  of  bread  and  butter  of  his  five 
o'clock  tea  before  charging  in  an  attack.  The  English 
people  showed  something  of  this  cold-bloodedness  in  their 
attitude  towards  the  war  at  the  beginning.  The  Govern- 
ment took  the  first  necessary  steps;  men  with  a  sense  of 
duty  or  of  adventurous  spirit  enlisted  en  masse  in  the 
ranks  of  the  army;  England  was  represented  in  the  war 
by  her  fleet  and  her  expeditionary  corps  to  a  larger  extent 
than  she  had  led  her  Allies  to  expect.  As  for  the  rest, 
she  thought  she  could  take  her  time.  .  .  .  "Wait  and 
see  what  is  coming."  It  must  be  said  in  her  favour, 
that,  during  the  first  six  months,  no  European  nation  fore- 
saw the  extent  of  the  effort  which  Germany's  resistance 
would  necessitate.  France  rose  to  the  occasion;  she  has 
surprised  the  world  by  the  promptness  of  her  decisions, 
the  effectiveness  of  her  material  organization,  and  the 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English    305 

vigour  of  her  moral  determination.  England,  however, 
did  not  remain  long  behind;  each  energetic  measure 
adopted  representing  a  victory  won  by  clear  thinking 
and  foreseeing  patriotism  over  the  nation's  happy-go- 
lucky  security  and  over-confident  routine. 

Questions  of  business  profits  have  played  their  part — I 
mean  that  these  interests  were  not  sacrificed  any  too 
willingly  or  quickly  to  the  higher  necessities  of  the  State's 
salvation.  For  months,  England,  while  uninvaded  and 
mistress  of  the  sea,  believed  she  could  conserve  her  com- 
mercial and  industrial  activity  almost  untouched.  "  Busi- 
ness as  usual"  was  the  watchword.  All  classes  shared 
this  responsibility.  The  merchant  class  held  to  its 
profits,  even  when  at  times  they  were  the  fruit  of  indirect 
traffic  with  the  enemy  through  neutral  countries.  The 
workingmen  were  unwilling  to  abandon  the  privileges 
which  the  social  struggle  of  late  years  had  secured  them, 
even  at  the  risk  of  placing  the  arm-  and  munition- 
output  in  a  bad  position  with  regard  to  the  German 
production. 

Little  by  little  this  untimely  attachment  to  the  habits 
or  advantages  of  peace-time  yielded  to  the  advice  given 
on  certain  solemn  occasions  by  the  members  of  the 
Government,  to  the  objurgations  of  the  big  daily  press 
and,  also,  it  must  be  recognized,  to  the  painful  lesson  of 
facts.  The  obstinacy  of  Germany  in  wishing  to  strike 
England  in  her  vital  activities,  her  useless  cruelty  against 
women,  children,  and  inoffensive  citizens  stirred  the 
hearts  of  the  English  with  feelings  which  were  unknown 
at  the  beginning  of  the  war:  patriotic  indignation  and 
anger  against  a  malicious  enemy.  Under  all  these  influ- 
ences, the  irreducible  individualism  characteristic  of 
the  English  mind,  gave  place  more  and  more  to  a  feeling 
of  national  solidarity.  The  moral  energy  which  had  won 
France  from  the  first  day  but  which  had  developed  in 


306    Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English 

only  a  few  English  consciences,  the  sacrifice  of  one's  self, 
of  one's  interests,  and  liberties  in  the  defence  of  the  country 
and  the  general  welfare  continued  to  gather  strength 
every  day,  until  finally  a  series  of  bold  and  vigorous 
special  laws  bound  into  a  single  sheath  all  the  energy, 
resources,  and  will  of  the  nation. 

The  r61e  of  the  Government  and  of  the  cabinet  members 
most  determined  and  most  generously  devoted  to  the 
cause  of  the  country,  was  one  of  the  important  factors  of 
England's  awakening.  Undoubtedly  she  committed  errors 
and  blunders ;  but  her  intentions  were  good  and  her  truth- 
fulness above  all  suspicion.  The  responsible  leaders, 
daily  increasing  the  scope  of  their  plans  and  the  intensity 
of  their  action,  accomplished  really  great  things  without 
which  the  heroism  of  France  and  courage  of  Russia  would 
have  been  in  vain.  It  is  this  ever-increasing  collaboration, 
this  generous  participation  in  the  common  task  which  I 
propose  to  trace  in  its  general  lines. 

Immediately  after  the  declaration  of  war,  the  entire 
Home-Fleet,  units  of  the  first  line  and  reserves,  battle- 
ships and  light  cruisers,  destroyers,  torpedo-boats,  and 
submarines,  with  full  crews,  was  at  its  post  of  observation 
and  combat  in  the  North  Sea  and  the  Channel.  During 
the  period  of  uncertainty,  when  negotiations  were  pro- 
ceeding, a  great  naval  review  had  been  held  at  Portsmouth 
— a  "providential  Review"  as  it  was  called — which  had 
grouped  under  the  shelter  of  the  Isle  of  Wight  the  four 
hundred  vessels  of  all  classes  destined  to  defend  England 
in  European  waters.  The  mobilization,  then,  was  an 
accomplished  fact.  The  formidable  power  of  this  floating 
rampart  sufficed  to  intimidate  Germany  whose  fleet, 
ambitiously  constructed  at  a  sheer  outlay  of  millions, 
prudently  sought  shelter  in  the  port  of  Cuxhaven,  in  the 
Kiel  Canal  and  the  Baltic,  behind  the  defences  of  Heligo- 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  the  English    307 

land  and  behind  long  series  of  mines.  The  Home-Fleet, 
deprived  of  the  sea-fight  which  it  sought,  devoted  itself 
with  patience  and  vigilance  to  its  r61e  of  protection.  The 
English  expeditionary  corps  began  to  land  in  France  as 
early  as  August  the  ninth.  This  was  the  commencement 
of  an  incessant  movement  of  transports,  of  freighters 
loaded  with  war  material,  and  of  hospital  ships,  which,  dur- 
ing periods  of  varying  intensity,  almost  daily,  ploughed 
their  way  across  the  Straits  of  Dover.  It  is  well  known 
that  not  a  German  cruiser  even  among  the  most  rapid 
has  risked  an  attack  on  these,  transports  or  their  escorts, 
and  that  the  German  submarines,  even  since  they  made 
use  of  Zeebrugge  have  not  succeeded  in  torpedoing  any 
ship  loaded  with  material  or  troops.  The  Sussex,  simply 
a  ferry-boat,  was  not  sunk.  Certain  patrol  groups,  how- 
ever, have  been  mortally  struck:  the  cruisers  Aboukir, 
Hogue,  and  Cressy,  and  the  battle-ship  Formidable.  Such 
losses  are  inevitable.  As  for  the  treacherous  and  odious 
attacks  of  the  German  submarine  against  the  Amiral- 
Ganteaume,  the  Falaba,  the  Lusitania,  and  others,  these 
are  unspeakable  crimes,  simply  acts  of  black  piracy  on  the 
part  of  their  authors,  which  the  British  fleet,  not  being 
able  to  foresee,  could  not  prevent. 

In  the  fogs,  night  and  day  on  the  qui-vive,  the  English 
fleet  has  accomplished  its  task  of  scouting  and  guard- 
ing with  constant  vigilance.  Beside  the  fleet,  English 
fishermen,  on  their  fishing  smacks,  have  carried  out  the 
dangerous  task  of  mine-dragging  with  as  much  courage 
as  skill,  in  a  constant  struggle,  without  thought  of  life, 
against  the  cowardly  practice  employed  in  violation  of  all 
maritime  laws  of  sowing  floating  mines  and  of  letting 
them  loose  blindly  against  warships  and  merchantmen, 
either  belligerent  or  neutral. 

The  British  Sea-Power — with  the  help  of  our  Fleet, 
co-operating  in  about  the  same  proportion  as  the  English 


3o8      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

expeditionary  corps  in  the  early  work  of  our  army — has 
won  for  England  and  for  ourselves  the  liberty  of  the 
seas.  This  was  an  immense  undertaking  because  of  its 
difficulties  and  consequences,  the  meaning  of  which 
cannot  be  too  much  emphasized.  By  its  means  not  only 
have  the  shores  of  Great  Britain  been  made  invulnerable, 
but  our  coasts  as  well  have  been  protected  against  incur- 
sions which  might  have  destroyed  our  ports  and  perhaps 
against  landing  expeditions  which  might  have  ravaged 
our  most  fertile  provinces.  Thanks  to  it,  not  only  has 
England  been  saved  from  famine,  but  we  ourselves  have 
been  able  to  keep  up  our  communications  freely  with 
over-sea  countries.  Without  it,  would  it  ever  have  been 
possible  for  us  to  make  good  our  lack  of  military  prepara- 
tion, our  inferiority  of  industrial  production,  and  the 
deficit  of  our  economical  resources?  Would  we  have  been 
able  to  import  horses  from  Argentine  or  Canada,  wheat 
and  cotton  from  the  United  States,  frozen  meat  from 
Australia  and  Uruguay,  cloth  stuffs  from  Lancashire, 
steel  from  the  Midlands — in  short  the  raw  materials 
and  manufactured  and  chemical  products,  indispensable 
in  an  "industrial  war" — from  all  countries  capable  of 
producing? 

By  the  month  of  October,  1915,  thanks  to  the  earlier 
victory  of  the  Marne,  our  armies  were  safe,  but  we  had 
lost  nine-tenths  of  our  iron-ore,  60%  of  our  coal  mines, 
and  76%  of  our  steel  output;  of  the  127  blast  furnaces  in 
activity,  95  had  fallen  into  the  power  of  the  enemy.  The 
men  who  drew  us  out  of  this  situation,  by  a  miracle  of 
energy,  intelligence,  and  organization  are  worthy  of  being 
placed  with  the  great  men  of  France,  in  the  front  rank  of 
history;  they  have  caused  factories  and  workshops  to 
spring  from  the  earth  and  have  given  France  an  arma- 
ment-power ten  times  superior  to  what  we  judged  sufficient 
in  time  of  peace.  This  second  victory  would  not  have 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      309 

been  possible  if  England  had  not  guaranteed  us  free  com- 
munication with  America  which  procured  us  iron,  and 
with  Scotland  and  Wales  which  furnished  us  coal. 

Our  colonies  would  have  offered  objectives,  almost 
without  defence  to  high-speed  German  cruisers,  if  these 
latter  had  not  been  hunted  down  by  British  flying  squad- 
rons. Instead  of  Tsing-Tao  being  put  in  a  state  of  siege, 
our  colonies  of  Indo-China  would  have  been  attacked, 
since  our  Dupleix  and  Montcalm  were  less  strong  than  the 
English  Monmouth  and  Good  Hope,  sunk  by  the  German 
Scharnhorst  and  Gneisenau,  before  these  latter  in  turn  were 
destroyed  by  a  second  English  attack.  Our  colonies  are 
intact;  on  the  other  hand,  the  German  colonies — their 
South-west  Africa  and  their  East  Africa  of  which  they 
were  so  proud,  after  the  conquest  of  Togoland  and  the 
Cameroun — have  fallen  into  the  hands  of  the  Allies. 

Security  in  the  home  waters  and  in  the  distant  oceans, 
full  opportunity  to  attack  the  German  colonies,  and 
certainty  of  being  supplied  with  all  that  they  lack,  such 
are  the  inestimable  advantages — one  may  even  say 
decisive — which  have  been  secured  to  the  Allies,  thanks 
to  the  English  fleet's  sea  supremacy. 

The  British  sailors'  spirit  of  daring  and  sacrifice  have 
won  them  some  noteworthy  successes. 

On  August  28,  1914,  in  a  bold  raid,  a  squadron  of 
cruisers  appeared  suddenly  in  the  bight  of  Heligoland  and 
attacked  the  German  cruisers  and  destroyers  moored  in 
these  waters.  Two  of  the  German  units  were  sunk  and  a 
third  burned.  Under  the  fire  of  the  forts  and  enemy's 
ships,  the  English  rescued  German  sailors  from  drowning. 
The  British  ships  withdrew  without  serious  injury.  What  a 
difference  there  is  between  an  exploit  of  this  kind  through 
mine-fields  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  a  port  powerfully 
defended,  and  the  enterprise  undertaken  the  i6th  of 


310      Past  and  Presnet  Work  of  English 

December,  by  German  crusiers  against  the  open  towns 
of  West  Hartlepool,  Scarborough,  and  Whitby  in  which 
the  bombardment  killed  and  wounded  567  civilians. 
One  is  an  act  of  war;  the  other  is  an  application  of  the 
system  of  murder  and  terror,  through  which  German 
militarism,  both  on  land  and  sea,  is  in  the  act  of  earning 
an  ugly  name  for  itself.  In  a  second  attempt  made  by 
some  German  cruisers  less  favoured  on  this  occasion  by  the 
fog,  the  English  fleet  replied  brilliantly.  An  immediate 
and  rapid  pursuit  forced  the  aggressors  to  steer  for  home ; 
and  one  of  the  finest  ships  of  the  squadron,  the  Blucher, 
was  sunk  by  British  shells.  When,  in  the  spring  of  1916, 
the  German  ships  made  a  third  attempt,  they  were  unable 
to  get  within  gun-shot  of  the  coast  and  dared  remain 
only  twenty  minutes  opposite  their  goals,  Yarmouth  and 
Lowestoft.  Finalty,  when,  goaded  to  action  by  the  dis- 
satisfaction of  the  German  people,  the  vaunted  High  Sea 
fleet  made  bold,  in  June,  1916,  to  leave  the  shelter  of  its 
harbours  and  mine-fields,  hoping  to  pounce  upon  the 
British  cruisers  unawares,  it  was  so  gallantly  met  and 
gripped  by  Admiral  Beatty's  lighter  squadron,  that  the 
battle-ships  had  time  to  come  up  and  join  the  fray.  The 
German  fleet  was  so  badly  bruised  (in  spite  of  the  lying 
bulletins  of  the  German  Admiralty  to  the  contrary)  that  it 
has  never  since  dared  to  take  to  sea  again. 

Submarines  escape  discovery  more  readily;  that  is  why 
these  boats,  acting  as  pirates,  have  been  able  to  attack 
so  many  merchantmen  and  fishing  smacks,  sinking  them 
frequently  without  warning  and  sometimes  pushing 
their  cruelty  to  the  point  of  preventing,  by  their  artillery, 
the  approach  of  rescue  boats.  Finally  they  have  surpassed 
their  own  sinister  exploits  in  bringing  about,  by  the  catas- 
trophe of  the  Lusitania,  a  disaster,  the  horror  of  which 
was  only  equalled  by  the  wholesale  massacres  of  the  civil 
population  of  Belgium,  and  the  cold-blooded  execution 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      311 

of  hostages,  by  batches,  in  France.  England  is  silently 
applying  more  and  more  effective  measures  against  this 
unspeakably  ferocious  institution  of  collective  murder. 

The  Home-Fleet  had  the  opportunity  of  co-operation 
with  the  land  forces  in  October  and  November,  1914,  when 
its  powerful  artillery  was  of  great  assistance  in  the  battle 
of  the  Dunes  and  helped  to  stop  the  German  rush  for 
Calais.  In  1915  and  1916  flat-bottomed  monitors,  armed 
with  powerful  cannon,  bombarded  Ostende  and  Zeebrugge 
several  times  and,  with  the  help  of  hydroplanes  damaged 
the  German  defences  of  the  Belgian  coast. 

While  these  events  were  happening  along  the  coasts  of 
England  and  Flanders,  British  squadrons  in  distant  seas 
were  not  inactive.  Over  the  vast  stretch  of  the  ocean, 
they  pursued  pirate  cruisers  and  passenger-boats  armed 
for  filibustering.  Despite  the  perfection  of  German 
plans  made  long  before  the  opening  of  hostilities  and 
despite  the  complacency  of  certain  neutral  States,  these 
corsairs  were  run  down  one  by  one  in  the  Atlantic,  in  the 
Pacific,  and  in  the  Indian  Oceans.  A  small  English 
squadron  did  not  hesitate  to  join  combat  with  a  more 
powerful  German  group  at  Coronel  off  the  coast  of  Chile. 
The  Monmouth  and  Good  Hope  battered  at  long  range 
went  down  with  all  aboard.  On  December  the  eighth, 
however,  the  same  German  cruisers  were  discovered  by  a 
new  British  squadron  off  the  Falkland  islands,  and  had 
to  fight  on  more  equal  terms:  The  Scharnhorst,  the 
Gneisenau,  the  Leipzig,  and  the  Nurnberg  were  sunk; 
the  Dresden  escaped,  but  was  destroyed  two  months  later 
by  a  vigilant  English  patrol.  Later,  the  Kronprinz- 
Wilhelm-der-Grosse  and  the  Emden  were  destroyed,  the 
Koenigsberg  was  "bottled  up"  and  the  Eitel-Friedrich 
forced  to  intern  in  a  United  States  port.  There  are 
no  more  German  corsairs  on  the  seas.  The  English 
losses,  in  merchant-ships,  however  painful,  amount  to 


312      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

only  a  small  fraction  of  the  total  tonnage  of  the  United 
Kingdom.  In  spite  of  the  German  piratical  method  of 
sea  warfare,  few  of  the  thousands  of  ships  which  serve 
to  supply  England  and  maintain  her  trade  have  changed 
their  sailing  dates;  the  transportation  of  the  troops  to 
or  from  India,  Australia,  New  Zealand,  and  Canada  has 
been  effected  without  impediment.  In  a  word,  England 
has  secured  with  triumphant  mastery  the  maintenance 
of  order  on  the  seas. 

By  the  beginning  of  the  year  1915,  the  safety  of  the 
oceans  having  been  definitely  established,  a  certain  number 
of  naval  units  became  free  for  an  important  operation  which 
had  been  decided  at  a  meeting  of  allied  ministers  at  Paris. 
February  the  twenty-sixth  an  Anglo-French  fleet  entered 
the  Dardanelles  and  undertook  the  methodical  bom- 
bardment of  the  German-armed  forts,  which  defended 
the  sea  route  to  Constantinople.  Despite  heavy  weather, 
floating  mines,  and  cannon,  the  operation  was  pushed 
with  a  daring  and  a  coolness  which  promised  rapid  success, 
when,  in  the  narrow  part  of  the  Strait  between  Chanak 
and  Kilid-Bahr,  torpedoes  discharged  from  the  shores, 
struck  the  French  battle-ship  Le  Bouvet  and  the  English 
battle-ships,  Irresistible  and  Ocean.  The  French  were  the 
more  cruelly  tried;  in  three  minutes  the  Bouvet  sank 
carrying  down  the  entire  crew  who  faced  death  with 
heroic  courage.  The  forcing  of  the  Straits  had  to  be 
postponed  until  an  Anglo-French  landing  corps  could  be 
brought  to  the  Gallipoli  peninsula  to  co-operate  with  the 
action  of  the  fleet. 

While  thus  conducting  simultaneously  active  operations, 
coast-guard  duty,  and  corsair  hunting,  the  English  fleet 
was  also  busy  cutting  Germany  from  her  means  of  supply 
by  sea,  while  the  French  fleet  in  the  Adriatic  was  operating 
in  a  like  manner  against  Austria.  Respectful  of  the  rights 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      313 

of  neutrals  and  of  international  conventions,  the  Allies 
intercepted  nothing  but  contraband  of  war  for  a  period 
of  seven  months.  Not  till  after  Germany  had  begun 
torpedoing  all  the  merchant  ships  within  reach  of  her 
submarines  without  inspecting  the  nature  of  their  cargo 
and  frequently  without  hailing  them  at  all,  did  the  Allied 
fleets  receive  the  mission,  following  an  "  Order  in  Council " 
issued  by  the  English  Government,  March  n,  1915,  to 
establish  a  complete  blockade,  that  is  to  put  a  stop  to 
importation  and  exportation  by  sea.  The  execution  of 
this  blockade  was  effected  in  keeping  with  international 
law  and  the  tacit  prescriptions  of  humanity:  it  has 
nothing  in  common  with  the  illegal  and  cruel  exploits 
of  the  German  submarines. 

Contrary  to  the  false  and  selfish  complaints  of  Germany, 
the  blockade  is  not  directed  against  non-combatants,  but 
against  the  provisioning  of  the  army  and  against  the 
economic  and  industrial  power  of  our  enemy,  upon  which 
is  chiefly  based  this  force  of  resistance.  If  the  women 
and  children  suffer  from  a  certain  scarcity  of  food-pro- 
ducts (which  has  never  reached  the  proportions  of  sheer 
want)  it  is  because  Germany  has  sacrificed  the  interests 
of  civilians  to  the  needs  of  her  troops  and  has  refused  to 
furnish  guarantees  which  would  have  allowed  the  pro- 
visioning of  the  non-combatants  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
army.  Germany  who  is  seeking  to  excite  the  pity  of 
neutral  States  had  no  pity  for  Belgium,  or  the  provinces 
of  Northern  France,  or  Poland,  or  Servia  whom  she  has 
fleeced  and  stripped  of  all  they  possess  and  of  all  they 
produce.  For  a  long  time  she  furnished  herself  with  what 
she  needed  through  neutral  States,  until  the  moment 
when  England  determined,  after  almost  inconceivable 
forbearance,  to  watch  the  economic  relations  of  Holland 
and  Sweden  with  their  powerful  neighbours  while  France 
undertook  to  see  to  the  correct  behaviour  of  Switzerland. 


314      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

In  this  way  the  blockade — without  ceasing  to  be  conducted 
with  respect  for  the  legitimate  rights  of  neutrals  and  the 
laws  of  international  intercourse — has  been  drawn  tighter 
and  has  become  continually  more  effective.  In  August, 
1915,  cotton  which  is  used  to  make  explosives  was  declared 
contraband  of  war.  In  January,  1916,  the  commerce 
of  the  neutrals  was  organized  through  the  medium  of 
societies  of  merchants  for  the  different  countries  con- 
cerned, in  such  a  way  that  only  legitimate  exchanges 
not  destined  to  serve  the  interests  of  our  enemies  were 
authorized.  With  necessary  severity — since  illegitimate 
trafficking  still  continued — the  "rationing"  of  the  neutrals 
had  to  be  finally  resorted  to  and  this  meant  the  reduction 
of  their  imports  to  the  average  rates  of  normal  years. 
Thanks  to  these  measures  the  cynical  and  sanguinary 
nation  which  had  begun  the  vast  conflict,  martyrized 
Belgium,  trod  Servia  underfoot,  sown  the  sea  with  murder 
and  the  earth  with  fire  and  destruction,  and  invented  the 
most  treacherous  and  savage  means  of  combat,  found 
herself  after  two  years  of  war,  with  a  shortage  which 
exercises  its  influence  on  the  financial  and  industrial 
centres  and  which  will  constitute,  after  the  first  defeats, 
an  element  of  demoralization,  the  first  stage  of  retribu- 
tion. It  is  thus  that  the  English  sea-power  permits  the 
Allies  to  stretch  the  blockade  barrier  around  the  Central 
Powers  and  to  compensate  the  military  inferiority  in 
which  their  attachment  to  peace  had  placed  them,  as 
well  as  to  prepare  for  decisive  victories. 

The  above  resume  indicates  what  has  been  done  or 
what  is  being  done  by  the  English  fleet  valiantly  sup- 
ported by  the  French  fleet  in  the  Mediterranean.  We 
expected  nothing  less  of  the  English  in  the  department  in 
which  they  have  held  the  first  rank  for  three  centuries. 
But  what  have  they  done  on  land  where  owing  to  tradition, 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      315 

to  fear  of  militarism,  and  a  feeling  of  insular  security  they 
have  refused  to  follow  the  other  nations  in  the  race  for 
armament?  On  land,  they  knew  they  could  play,  at 
first,  only  a  secondary  part;  they  had  promised  to  do 
nothing  beyond  that.  This  secondary  part,  they  played 
most  valiantly  from  the  start.  Since,  they  have  under- 
taken in  a  sincere  spirit  of  solidarity  with  regard  to  their 
Allies,  to  increase  their  military  power  to  an  extent  that 
their  opponents  had  not  foreseen  and  that  their  friends 
had  not  dared  to  hope  for.  What  England  has  done  and 
is  doing  today  to  create  a  numerous  army  in  all  its  parts 
and  to  throw  it  in  time  on  the  battlefields,  will  be,  when 
the  facts  are  well  known,  one  of  the  subjects  of  universal 
surprise.  England  has  furnished  this  effort  by  means 
peculiar  to  herself  and  very  different  from  those  employed 
by  France  who  is  obliged  by  certain  historical  and  geo- 
graphical fatalities  to  hold  important  military  forces 
in  constant  readiness.  These  means  have  their  incon- 
veniences, but  the  French,  as  friends  and  allies,  ought  to 
recognize  their  grandeur  which  is  in  keeping  with  the 
moral  value  of  the  English  people  as  revealed  at  all  epochs, 
in  their  civilization,  customs,  literature,  and  individual 
qualities. 

The  conferences  which  had  taken  place  between  the 
English  and  French  General  Staffs  before  the  war  had 
anticipated,  in  case  of  an  attack  against  France  and  of  the 
violation  of  Belgian  soil,  the  transportation  of  an  expedi- 
tionary force  of  120,000  men  which  England  had  rendered 
available  thanks  to  the  reorganization  of  her  "territorial" 
army  (that  is  of  the  corps  of  volunteers  destined  to  defend 
British  territory).  It  was  this  expeditionary  force,  "the 
despicable  little  army  of  mercenaries, "  as  William  II. 
called  it,  which  disembarked  from  the  ninth  to  the  six- 
teenth of  August  on  our  Western  coasts  under  the  orders 
of  Field-Marshal  French.  It  drew  up  under  the  fortress 


316      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

of  Maubeuge  and  received  the  mission  to  form  our  left 
wing  when  we  advanced  to  meet  the  German  army  along 
the  front  Dinant-Charleroi-Mons.  The  forces  against 
which  the  allied  army  had  to  contend  outnumbered  every- 
thing that  the  most  carefully  deduced  calculations  could 
anticipate.  The  English  Army  in  particular  had  to 
support  at  Mons  the  furious  assault  of  Von  Kluck  who 
was  leading  a  flank  movement  destined  to  oblige  the 
Allies,  unless  reinforced,  to  retreat.  The  English  fought 
one  against  three  for  five  days,  suffering  heavy  losses  but 
holding  out  as  long  as  it  was  humanly  possible  to  do  so. 
When  the  retreat  was  decided  upon,  they  retired  in  good 
order  and  succeeded  in  retarding  the  enemy's  advance; 
their  cavalry,  in  particular,  accomplished  a  series  of 
brilliant  feats  of  arms  in  the  forest  of  Compiegne.  When 
the  order  was  given  by  General  Joffre  to  assume  the 
offensive  and  "to  die  rather  than  give  ground,"  they 
played  their  part  in  the  battle  of  the  Marne  flanked  by 
two  French  armies.  After  ten  days'  battle,  and  after  the 
final  precipitation  of  the  German  defeat,  the  English 
contingent  took  up  an  entrenched  position  on  the  banks 
of  the  Aisne  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Soissons:  and  then, 
later,  a  position  north  of  Ypres,  at  La  Bassee. 

The  qualities  of  which  they  had  given  proof  in  the 
course  of  these  terrible  weeks  were  those  which  honour  the 
British  soldier  in  history:  coolness,  tenacity  in  resisting, 
and  impassiveness  in  the  face  of  death.  Less  ardent  in 
attack,  less  capable  of  elan  and  audacity  than  the  French 
soldier,  the  English  soldier  showed  on  this  occasion  his 
traditional  stoicism.  With  surprising  firmness,  under 
a  hail  of  shells,  he  waited  until  the  storming  masses  of  the 
Germans  were  within  a  hundred  yards;  then  he  cut  them 
down  under  a  deadly  fire  regulated  as  in  practice  at  the 
butts.  The  retreat  under  the  irresistible  pressure  of 
superior  forces  was  effected  by  echelons,  in  perfect  order, 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      317 

very  few  wounded  soldiers,  guns,  or  wagons  being  aban- 
doned to  the  enemy.  The  contempt  of  death  shown  by 
these  regiments  equals  the  heroism  of  Waterloo  and 
Balaklava:  instance  the  cavalry  regiment,  which  after 
swimming  the  Aisne  under  the  fire  of  the  enemy,  sabred 
the  gunners  at  their  pieces,  instance  also  at  the  critical 
moment  of  the  battle  of  the  Yser,  the  army  which,  counting 
27,000  men  at  the  outset,  returned  less  than  5000  bayonets 
strong. 

The  expeditionary  corps  which,  despite  its  feeble  effec- 
tive forces  thus  lent  us  appreciable  assistance,  was  not 
composed  of  "mercenaries,"  as  it  pleased  the  Kaiser  to 
announce  in  derision,  but  of  professional  soldiers  (similar 
lo  our  "colonials")  with  a  staff  of  officers  belonging  to  the 
important  aristocratic  families  and  the  elite  of  the  middle- 
classes.  If  this  corps  did  not  virtually  represent  the 
English  nation,  it  already  represented  the  English  spirit 
not  only  in  its  firmness  and  calm  courage  but  also  in 
its  dignity  and  fairness.  Against  an  adversary  fre- 
quently savage  and  treacherous  it  disdained  to  employ 
the  contemptible  artifices  which  it  saw  employed  against 
itself  and  to  answer  inhumanity  with  inhumanity.  The 
English  remained  chivalrous  so  as  not  to  fall  beneath 
themselves.  But  their  imagination  redoubled  their  courage. 
The  story  of  the  treachery  and  cruelty  of  which  they  were 
victims  aroused  among  their  countrymen  a  wave  of  anger 
which  in  a  few  weeks  transformed  a  defensive  war,  ac- 
cepted as  a  necessity,  into  a  war  of  national  patriotism. 

What  was  happening  in  England  during  the  early 
vicissitudes  of  the  campaign  in  France?  Now  the  English 
people  might  have  entrenched  itself  behind  the  selfish 
point  of  view  of  territorial  defence.  They  had  fulfilled 
their  engagements  with  regard  to  Belgium  and  France; 
their  fleet  was  mistress  of  the  seas,  protecting  the  coasts 
of  France  as  well  as  those  of  Great  Britain;  they  were 


318      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

generous  with  their  funds  as  they  had  always  been  in 
the  crises  of  history  in  which  the  balance  of  power  had 
been  in  jeopardy.  Nothing  obliged  them  to  do  more  than 
reinforce  their  "territorial"  army  to  oppose  a  landing  in 
the  unlikely  case  in  which  Germany  might  succeed  in 
forcing  the  barrier  of  their  fleet.  They  might,  perhaps, 
even  turn  an  ear  to  certain  base  suggestions  of  interest 
(as  Germany,  who  knows  something  of  Machiavelism, 
did  not  fail  to  insinuate)  and  make  the  calculation  that 
the  longer  the  war  lasted,  the  more  time  they  would 
have  to  supplant  German  commerce  in  the  markets  of  the 
world.  'While  Europe  was  weakening  and  ruining  herself, 
Albion,  being  almost  entirely  in  possession  of  her  resources 
in  men  and  money,  would  gain  an  advantage  over  her 
neighbours  which  could  no  longer  be  wrested  from  her. 
This  insinuation  was  poisonous;  but  above  all  it  was 
absurd,  for,  even  supposing  that  England  should  lose  less 
than  the  others,  the  slowing  down  of  her  activities  would 
be  prejudicial  to  her.  What  did  England  do? 

England  had  never  possessed  a  national  army:  her 
young  men  were  not  used  to  the  noble  but  heavy  bur- 
den of  conscription ;  yet,  in  the  midst  of  war,  despite  the 
technical  and  economical  difficulties  about  to  be  encoun- 
tered, despite  the  sacrifices  about  to  be  demanded  of  her 
citizens,  she  resolved  to  constitute  an  army  which,  in  num- 
ber, value,  and  armament  might  be  favourably  compared 
with  the  allied  armies,  and  hasten  by  its  intervention  the 
final  decision.  The  enterprise,  as  one  may  imagine,  was 
gigantic.  To  cause  the  appearance,  within  a  few  months, 
of  three  million  men  capable  of  playing  their  part  without 
inferiority  in  modern  warfare  despite  the  absence  of 
traditions  and  of  extensive  military  organization ;  to  form 
leaders  for  these  improvised  battalions,  not  only  resolute 
but  scientifically  instructed;  to  maintain  manufacture, 
equipment,  rifles,  cannon,  munitions,  and  the  indispensable 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      3J9 

means  of  transportation,  was  a  task  which  perhaps  Eng- 
land, alone,  thanks  to  her  economic  and  industrial  resources 
and  to  her  reserves  of  physical  and  moral  force,  could 
carry  to  a  successful  issue.  To  accomplish  this  she  was 
neither  obliged  by  previous  engagements  nor  by  absolute 
necessity.  She  acted  without  hesitation — no  doubt  be- 
cause in  doing  so  she  was  insuring  herself  in  view  of  the 
final  victory  and  of  the  destruction  of  German  militarism 
— but  also  (she  announced  simply  and  loyally)  to  permit 
France  to  husband  her  forces  and  to  come  out  of  the 
struggle  with  enough  vitality  to  reconquer  her  place  in 
Europe  as  a  great  nation.  That  we  shall  never  forget. 

First  of  all,  men  were  necessary.  England  had  enough 
confidence  in  the  spirit  of  duty  and  sacrifice  of  her  citizens 
to  expect  the  recruiting  of  her  new  armies  from  voluntary 
enlistment.  Obliged  to  become  for  a  time  a  military 
nation,  she  did  not  wish  to  dispense  with  the  principles 
which  the  regime  of  liberty  had  fixed  in  the  island.  This 
determination  which  would  have  been  perilous  for  any 
other  nation  galvanized  the  forces  of  the  country.  On 
August  the  twenty-third,  after  the  battle  of  Charleroi, 
the  English  Army  was  increased  by  100,000  men;  on  the 
twenty-eighth,  after  the  fall  of  Namur  and  the  threatened 
investment  of  Antwerp,  the  House  of  Commons  voted  a 
second  levy  of  100,000  men.  The  rapid  advance  of  the 
invading  army  across  France  revealed  the  full  power  of 
the  German  war  machine,  the  force  of  which  neither 
England  nor  we  ourselves  had  correctly  judged:  England 
faced  this  stern  reality  with  calm.  She  increased  to 
(1,000,000)  a  million  the  number  of  volunteers  to  be 
called  in  1914.  After  the  victory  of  the  Maine  and  the 
desperate  struggle  of  the  two  opponents  to  outflank  each 
other  to  the  west,  when  the  battle  front  lengthened  un- 
ceasingly until  the  line  of  trenches  ran  into  the  sea,  and 


320      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

when  it  appeared  that  men  were  wanted  and  still  more 
men  to  resist  the  German  onslaught  and  later  assume 
the  offensive  .  .  .  then  England  decided  that  a  second 
million  of  volunteers  should  be  called  in  1915,  which,  with 
the  " regulars,"  the  "territorials "  and  the  native  auxiliaries 
raised  the  number  of  men  under  the  British  flag  to  three 
millions.  To  these  forces  should  be  added  the  200,000 
Canadians  and  the  150,000  Australians  and  New-Zea- 
landers  which  sufficient  reserves  were  to  maintain  con- 
stantly at  the  same  level. 

The  country  replied  to  the  appeal  of  the  Government 
in  a  splendid  spirit  of  abnegation.  The  recruiting  sta- 
tions opened  throughout  the  entire  country  were  besieged 
by  long  files  of  men  of  all  conditions  between  eighteen 
and  forty  years,  impatient  to  have  themselves  enrolled 
on  the  army  lists.  This  stream  had  to  be  canalized  and 
the  enlistments  organized  by  stages.  The  names  of  those 
who  were  recognized  fit  for  service  were  recorded  and 
they  were  assigned  a  date  on  which  to  appear  when  their 
turn  should  come.  A  continual  current  of  recruits  was 
thus  formed,  at  the  rate  of  30,000  a  week.  It  was  im- 
possible to  equip,  arm,  and  train  a  greater  number  of 
men  at  the  same  time. 

The  first  to  present  themselves  were  the  young  men  of 
the  upper-classes  and  the  workingmen. 

There  were  regiments  from  Cambridge  and  from  Oxford 
(in  which  the  Prince  of  Wales  served  in  the  ranks  before 
being  attached  to  the  General  Staff),  from  Eton  and 
Harrow  and  the  other  schools.  Among  the  workingmen, 
particularly  among  the  miners,  there  was  great  enthusi- 
asm. It  will  be  readily  understood  why  the  first  examples 
came  from  the  richer  and  the  poorer  classes:  neither  was 
prevented  by  considerations  of  a  material  order.  The 
rich  did  not  have  to  concern  themselves  about  straight- 
ened circumstances  which  their  momentary  absence  or 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      321 

death  might  occasion.  The  poor  knew  that  the  State 
would  provide  for  the  needs  of  their  family.  For  the 
volunteers  of  the  middle-class,  the  case  was  more  complex ; 
they  had  no  capital  with  which  to  make  good  the  loss  of 
income  from  their  work,  and  in  their  situation  the  Govern- 
ment allowance  was  insufficient.  One  can  understand 
that  they  deliberated  longer  than  the  others. 

With  all  these  volunteers,  to  whichever  class  they  be- 
longed, it  is  important  to  note  that  the  decision  was  a 
moral  act,  a  fact  which  does  high  honour  to  the  English 
conscience.  Let  us  try  and  imagine — the  legal  obligation 
not  intervening  here  to  impose  its  categorical  imperative — 
the  state  of  inner  struggle  into  which  many  were  thrown. 
In  presence  of  material  possibilities,  such  as  the  loss  of  a 
situation  or  the  decline  of  a  business,  and  of  moral  pos- 
sibilities such  as  the  pain  of  a  cruel,  maybe  final,  separa- 
tion or  the  suffering  of  those  most  cherished,  should  a  man 
sacrifice  himself  to  his  country?  These  problems,  just 
as  painful  in  England  as  in  our  country  where  they  are 
solved  beforehand  by  legal  necessity,  put  a  question  to  the 
conscience  of  every  Englishman  and  had  to  be  settled 
freely  by  him. 

Moral  solidity  of  character  and  individual  force  of  con- 
science gave  birth  to  numerous  and  enthusiastic  cases  of 
devotion.  When  one  reflects  about  the  moral  obstacles 
which  the  English  have  surmounted,  considering  they  were 
friends  of  peace,  ill-prepared  by  their  past  for  military 
effort,  authorized  to  believe  themselves  in  safety  on  their 
island  under  protection  of  their  fleet,  one  will  recognize 
that  the  movement  of  voluntary  enlistment  was  a  great 
and  glorious  achievement.  National  vitality  carried  the 
day  against  the  softening  influences  of  prosperity  and 
peace.  National  honour  did  not  permit  England  to  re- 
main inferior  to  her  rdle  as  a  great  nation  when  not 
only  her  future  but  the  future  of  Europe  was  at  stake. 


322      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

Public  opinion  intervened  to  support  and  stimulate 
individual  will.  From  the  outset  clubs  were  formed 
which,  after  having  set  an  example,  covered  the  country 
with  posters  and  appeals  which  pursued  the  lukewarm 
and  the  wavering  as  an  obsession.  Some  needed  time 
before  they  were  stirred  and  ready  to  follow  the  example 
of  the  first  volunteers.  The  English  temper,  which  is 
not  ardent  and  spirited  like  ours,  but  slow  in  getting 
under  way,  has  need  of  being  struck  a  series  of  vigorous 
blows.  That  is  why  the  English  Press  Bureau  published 
after  each  action  the  list  of  losses,  of  which  the  afflicting 
totals  far  from  discouraging  men  only  urged  them  to 
action.  The  German  atrocities,  the  cruel  treatment  in- 
flicted on  British  prisoners,  the  sinister  exploits  of  their 
pirates  at  sea,  the  raids  of  the  Zeppelins,  poisonous  gas 
and  jets  of  flame — all  such  savage  acts  which  one  may  say 
were  not  only  crimes  but  also  mistakes  on  Germany's 
part — echoed  most  painfully  in  the  hearts  of  Englishmen, 
and  became  the  best  possible  recruiting  agents  for  the 
enrolment.  At  the  beginning  of  the  war  sports  went  on  as 
usual  and  the  great  matches  continued  to  attract  and 
stir  the  crowds.  But  under  the  pressure  of  events  and 
public  opinion,  leading  sportsmen  understood  that  their 
place  was  not  on  the  athletic  field  but  at  the  front,  with 
the  result  that  battalions  of  cricketers  and  footballers 
were  formed.  The  women,  too,  made  noble  use  of  their 
influence;  there  was  scarcely  an  English  girl  who  did  not 
have  it  understood  that  she  would  never  bestow  her  affec- 
tion on  a  coward.  During  the  first  year  of  the  war 
volunteers  joined  the  army  as  fast  as  the  Government 
was  able  to  provide  for  their  incorporation. 

The  gigantic  development  of  war  operations  put  the 
Allies  more  and  more  under  the  obligation  of  organizing 
all  their  men  and  resources  so  as  to  be  able,  by  constantly 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      323 

filling  in  the  gaps  of  their  initial  "preparation,"  to  domi- 
nate finally  their  redoubtable  enemies  by  the  number  of 
battalions  and  the  abundance  of  war  material.  England 
had  said  at  the  outset :  the  forces  of  the  Allies  will  continue 
to  grow  thanks  to  the  advantages  which  the  supremacy 
of  the  sea  secures  them.  She  was  about  to  apply  herself 
towards  making  this  growth  of  forces,  without  which  there 
could  be  no  victory,  the  direct  object  of  her  will  and 
effort.  The  first  step  was  to  conceive  a  fitting  organiza- 
tion for  the  employment  of  all  men  obtainable  where 
they  would  be  likely  to  render  the  maximum  service. 
The  demand  for  men  was  divided  between  the  army  which 
had  to  have  another  million  men  and  the  war  industries 
which  had  just  been  placed  under  the  directing  and 
centralizing  authority  of  the  State  for  the  intensive  pro- 
duction of  munitions.  The  best  solution  would  have 
been  to  have  recourse  to  that  comprehensive  method  of 
reckoning  and  utilization  of  all  valid  men  known  as 
conscription,  which  France's  example  has  proved  to  be 
compatible  with  democratic  liberty.  The  English  Govern- 
ment, while  reserving  the  right  to  make  use,  if  need  be,  of 
this  extreme  means,  drew  back  before  so  sharp  and  pate- 
gorical  a  rupture  with  the  most  cherished  forms  of  liberty 
in  the  country.  For  the  English  the  absence  of  obligatory 
military  service  is  not  only  one  of  those  traditions  from 
which  they  separate  with  repugnance;  it  is  also  a  thing 
to  be  proud  of — a  thing  which  gives  the  "islander"  a 
privileged  place  among  Europeans  and  what  is  more,  a 
guarantee — as  it  appears  in  the  light  of  the  history  of 
nations — against  any  attempt  at  oppression.  Without 
obligatory  military  service  England  had  conquered 
enemies  as  formidable  as  Philip  II.,  Louis  XIV.,  and 
Napoleon;  voluntary  enlistments  had  always  sufficed 
not  only  for  sea  defence  but  for  land  defence  as  well  and 
had  many  a  time  permitted  England  to  take  her  place 


324      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

with  the  continental  armies  which  had  struck  the  de- 
cisive blows.  In  the  course  of  three  centuries  of  history 
there  had  been  formed  in  the  mind  of  the  nation  one  of 
those  intuitive  convictions  which  have  the  force  of  in- 
stinct; that,  thanks  to  the  privilege  of  liberty,  English 
moral  individualism  has  always  called  in  action  in  times 
of  danger  the  sacrifices  necessary  for  the  salvation  of  the 
country.  That  this  conviction  is  not  erroneous,  the 
magnificent  movement  of  3,000,000  voluntary  enlistments 
distinctly  proves.  No  other  country  in  the  world  pro- 
bably could  have  furnished  the  spectacle  of  so  great  an 
amount  of  spontaneous  devotion  to  public  welfare  and 
of  so  splendid  an  offering  of  young  lives  voluntarily  made 
to  the  cause  of  national  defence. 

But  the  conditions  of  this  war  are  not  those  of  previous 
wars.  France  has  levied  the  totality  of  her  men  fit  for 
service;  Russia  is  drawing  from  the  immense  reservoir 
of  her  populations  all  the  men  she  can  equip  and  arm. 
England  could  not  do  less.  For  this  supreme  effort,  an 
appeal  to  the  sentiment  of  duty  was  no  longer  sufficient. 
In  every  nation  there  exists  an  element  of  amorphous 
individuals,  neither  good  nor  bad,  who  may  become  good 
if  a  firm  will — that  of  the  State — takes  the  helm  of  their 
vacillating  consciences.  There  exists  also  an  irreducible 
fraction  of  ill-will,  selfishness  or  doctrinal  obstinacy, 
rebellious  to  all  persuasion.  The  point  in  question  was  to 
reach  precisely  these  two  elements;  their  importance  was 
estimated  at  3,000,000  men  between  the  ages  of  eighteen 
and  forty-one. 

The  Government  leaders  set  about  preparing  the 
country,  in  the  course  of  the  summer  of  1915  (when  the 
Russian  retreat  had  just  shown  the  new  and  obligatory 
extension  of  the  war)  to  the  necessity  of  a  stronger  mili- 
tary effort.  The  word  conscription  was  pronounced 
several  times  not  as  a  measure  which  the  Government 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      325 

thought  of  taking,  but  as  an  extreme  measure  which  it 
might  be  forced  to  adopt.  The  needs  of  further  industrial 
organization  furnished  the  opportunity  in  the  month  of 
July,  of  taking  a  preliminary  step :  the  census  of  the  strong 
and  active  population.  There  was  nothing  alarming  in 
this  measure;  men  and  women  were  listed  between  the 
ages  of  seventeen  and  sixty-five.  It  was  evidently  not 
a  question  of  taking  a  first  step  towards  enforcing 
compulsory  service.  Nevertheless  the  idea  of  inten- 
sifying recruiting  was  not  absent  from  the  minds  of  the 
Government  leaders.  Their  intentions  were  soon  to  be 
made  evident. 

For  the  application  of  new  methods  a  new  man  was 
necessary — a  statesman  and  diplomat  who  would  handle 
not  so  much  the  military  difficulties  of  army  organization 
as  the  civil  difficulties  of  the  relations  with  parties,  authori- 
ties, and  groups  for  the  purpose  of  finding  means  both 
sufficiently  conciliatory  and  firm  enough  to  obtain  better 
results  in  recruiting.  Lord  Kitchener  ceded  the  new  r61e 
to  Lord  Derby. 

The  task  of  the  recruiting  minister  was  a  double  one; 
first  to  get  into  close  enough  touch  with  the  men  to 
awaken  in  them  the  voice  of  conscience  which  had  re- 
mained deaf  to  general  appeals;  second,  to  classify  the 
recruits  according  to  an  order  which  should  take  into 
account  age,  technical  serviceableness,  and  personal 
situations,  that  is  to  encourage  all  men  of  goodwill  by 
securing  for  them  the  guarantees  of  logic  and  justice. 
It  was  to  be,  then,  an  administrative  organization  as  well 
regulated  as  a  plan  of  universal  service — without  the 
obligation.  The  method  which  was  to  permit  individual 
contact  with  the  men  for  registration  was  furnished  by  the 
procedure  used  in  the  elections.  The  recruiting  campaign 
took  on  the  aspect  of  an  electoral  canvas.  Volunteer 
agents  (men  already  registered)  belonging  to  all  trades, 


326      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

all  parties,  and  all  social  classes,  visited  people  in  their 
homes  and  made  use  of  such  means  of  persuasion  as  are 
more  particularly  effective  with  the  English;  personal 
reasons,  general  reasons  based  on  the  opinion  of  a  leader 
or  group  or  party,  moral  pressure  in  the  name  of  "loyalty, " 
either  patriotic,  political,  religious,  or  athletic,  and  some- 
times material  pressure  in  the  name  of  an  employer,  of  the 
local  authority  or  of  the  State  as  protector.  The  can- 
vassers had  to  overcome  not  only  a  tendency  to  less 
promptness  in  paying  the  blood-tax,  but  frequently  quite 
legitimate  hesitations.  Did  not  so  and  so  find  himself 
paralysed  by  a  case  of  conscience,  since  he  was  deterred 
from  performing  the  more  remote  duty  by  some  nearer 
duty  at  home?  Was  not  another  held  back  by  certain 
financial  troubles,  or  certain  commercial  obligations,  or 
by  the  fear  of  ruining  the  future  of  his  business,  or  of 
being  outstripped  by  a  competitor?  The  agents  of  Lord 
Derby  applied  themselves  to  reducing  these  objections,  to 
guaranteeing  moratory  delays,  and  to  obtaining  business 
settlements  and  securities  for  the  duration  of  the  war. 

The  formation  of  "groups"  aided  considerably  in  the 
success  of  the  Derby  plan.  The  men  were  distributed, 
according  to  age,  strength,  family  status,  in  classes  to 
be  called  successively — thus  guaranteeing  the  enlistment 
of  the  older  men  after  the  younger,  and  reserving  the 
auxiliary  occupations  for  the  least  fit.  The  distribution 
into  groups  was  completed  by  the  Premier's  solemn 
promise  that  the  married  men  would  leave  only  after  the 
unmarried  men  had  first  been  drafted.  A  thorough 
inquiry  undertaken  by  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and 
Industry,  ever  since  the  manufacture  of  cannon  and 
munition  had  become  a  State  enterprise  and  had  united 
and  centralized  thousands  of  workshops,  had  specified 
the  trades  and  professions  indispensable  to  the  industrial 
preparation  of  the  war  and  for  the  continuation  of  the 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      327 

economic  life  of  the  country.  The  "starred"  men  were 
requested  to  enlist  as  the  others,  but  were  to  be  mobilized 
at  the  factory  or  workshop  or  other  place  of  occupation 
marked  "reserved":  a  badge  indicated  that  they  were 
doing  their  duty  as  soldiers  in  a  civil  function.  To 
settle  the  delicate  question  of  ascertaining  whether  such 
and  such  a  person  belonged  effectively  to  the  category 
marked  "reserved"  or  was  authorized  by  his  age  or  pro- 
fessional skill  to  form  part  of  the  percentage  stipulated 
in  each  special  trade,  local  courts  were  established  which 
offered  full  guarantees  of  competency  and  impartiality. 

The  system  appears  complicated.  Yet,  in  reality,  the 
admirable  activity  of  the  municipal  authorities  and  the 
traditions  of  corporate  and  personal  initiative  established 
long  ago  in  that  individualistic  and  decentralized  country, 
permitted,  in  two  months,  from  October  I5th  to  December 
1 5th  to  ascertain  the  military  situation  of  nearly  3,000,000 
men  able  to  be  drafted,  or  exactly  2,950,514  of  whom 
428,853  were  refused  for  reasons  of  health. 

Lord  Derby  in  his  report  and  Lord  Kitchener  in  his 
communication  to  the  House  of  Lords,  were  authorized 
to  announce  that  the  system  of  voluntary  engagements 
had  given  satisfactory  results  and  that  the  country  had 
replied  to  the  Government's  appeal  with  a  zeal  which 
did  honour  to  its  lofty  sentiment  of  patriotic  duty.  Lord 
Derby's  statistics,  however,  showed  that  the  married 
men  had  enlisted  under  the  flag  in  greater  numbers  than 
the  unmarried  men.  The  remainder  of  the  refractory 
bachelors  amounted  to  651,160.  Was  the  country  willing 
to  accept  the  fact  that  the  men  who  had  assumed  the 
social  responsibility  of  heads  of  a  family  and  who  bore  the 
heaviest  social  burdens,  should  sacrifice  themselves  for 
those  who,  without  charges  or  responsibilities  were 
evading  military  duty  as  well?  The  Premier  had  already 
replied  to  this  fear  by  engaging  his  word;  seeing  that  the 


328      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

number  of  unmarried  men  not  enlisted  was  far  from  being 
negligible  both  from  the  military  point  of  view  and  with 
regard  to  the  civic  principles  at  stake,  his  promise  ought 
to  be  kept.  The  Government,  therefore,  resolved  to  intro- 
duce into  the  House  of  Commons  a  conscription  bill, 
limited  and  temporary,  for  bachelors  between  the  ages  of 
eighteen  and  forty-one,  or  widowers  without  children. 

It  would  seem  that  the  importance  of  the  moral  and 
national  reasons  which  had  determined  the  decision,  that 
the  gravity  of  the  circumstances  and  the  pressing  necessity 
of  the  war  should  have  assured  the  success  of  the  bill 
without  discussion.  This  was  not  the  case ;  a  rather  lively 
opposition  came  from  a  small  group  of  uncompromising 
Radicals  and  from  the  representatives  of  the  Labour 
party.  The  capital  fact,  however,  which  stood  out  from 
a  political  struggle  lasting  three  weeks,  was  the  restricted 
and  feeble  character  of  the  opposition,  the  ease  with 
which  it  was  reduced,  and  the  impressive  enthusiasm  of  the 
nation  offering  the  Government,  almost  unanimously,  the 
decisive  support  of  the  national  will,  stirred  with  patriotic 
honour,  steadfastly  faithful  to  the  cause  of  the  Allies, 
and  sweeping  away  all  resistance  in  a  splendid  movement 
of  self-assertion  and  firmness.  What  dominated  the 
whole  debate  was  that  the  authority  of  the  ministers, 
responsible  for  the  new  attitude  of  the  cabinet,  enabled 
them  to  defend  their  views — without  deviating  from  the 
tact  and  circumspection  proper  to  "leaders"  of  a  parlia- 
mentary majority — supported  by  the  warm  approbation 
of  a  nation  finally  enlightened,  unmistakably  warned  of  the 
danger  and  obligations  incumbent  on  it  and  resolved  to 
do  its  patriotic  duty  as  well  as  its  duty  to  Europe. 

The  Under  Secretaries  of  State,  Henderson,  Brace,  and 
Roberts,  who  had  at  first  offered  their  resignations  to  the 
Prime  Minister,  consented  to  reconsider  their  decision. 
The  argument  of  Mr.  Asquith:  "that  conscription,  not 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      329 

limited  but  universal,  concorded,  in  France,  with  the 
most  liberal  democracy"  did  not  remain  without  effect. 
The  words  of  General  Seely,  former  Secretary  of  War,  in 
command  of  a  brigade  at  the  front:  "that  all  France 
had  eyes  turned  towards  their  friends  of  England  and 
were  expecting  from  them  the  encouragement  of  a  virile 
decision,"  did  not  fail  to  arouse  people  to  action.  In 
what  fortress,  then,  were  the  last  resistances  entrenched, 
since  it  was  neither  lack  of  patriotism,  nor  misunderstand- 
ing of  the  situation,  nor  cowardice  in  the  presence  of  duty? 
This  fortress  still  untaken  was  no  other  than  class-con- 
flict. The  trade-unionists,  suspicious  of  a  middle-class 
government,  feared  that  under  colour  of  conscription,  even 
limited  and  temporary,  this  middle-class  would  prepare 
a  more  comprehensive  and  durable  measure  which,  during 
the  war,  would  result  in  industrial  conscription,  and,  after 
the  war,  would  leave  England  under  the  regime  of  perma- 
nent obligatory  service.  The  excess  of  zeal  shown  by  the 
Conservative  party  which  exerted  itself  for  universal 
conscription  had  really  harmed  the  Prime  Minister  whose 
intentions  had  never  been  to  strangle  the  traditional 
prerogatives  of  the  British  citizen.  He  wished  simply 
to  effect  a  compromise  with  a  view  to  a  definite  need, 
following  the  best  English  political  method :  the  voluntary 
enlistments  had  given  results  which  had  done  honour  to 
the  patriotism  and  national  sense  of  duty;  they  had 
responded  to  the  desiderata  of  the  Secretary  for  war 
during  the  first  sixteen  months;  the  only  point  now  in 
question  was  to  adopt  the  measure  necessary  to  encourage 
a  decision  among  the  last  group  of  men  willing  to  enlist 
but  held  back  by  a  legitimate  family  attachment,  by 
furnishing  them  guarantees  against  the  selfishness  of 
certain  unmarried  men.  Between  the  first  and  second 
reading  of  the  bill  Mr.  Asquith  gave  his  word:  first,  that 
the  conscription  would  in  no  way  affect  the  regime  of 


33°      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

industrial  production  which  should  remain  under  the 
status  of  free-contract ;  second,  that  the  obligatory  service 
of  unmarried  men  was  a  temporary  measure,  necessi- 
tated by  the  regrettable  luke-warmness  of  a  restricted 
category  of  citizens  whom  the  law  wanted  only  for  the 
duration  of  the  war.  A  private  conference  of  the  Govern- 
ment leaders  with  the  delegates  of  the  Trade-Unions, 
at  Westminster,  succeeded  in  dissipating  all  misunder- 
standings. The  Workingmen's  party,  whose  object  was, 
more  particularly,  to  affirm  its  importance  in  the  Councils 
of  the  State  and  to  strengthen  its  legislative  conquests, 
had  no  intention  whatever  of  pushing  its  resistance  to  the 
point  of  obstruction.  In  short  the  refractory  minority 
which  totalled  a  tenth  of  the  votes  at  the  first  reading  of 
the  bill,  dropped  considerably  at  the  second,  and  fell  to 
nothing  after  the  third. 

The  conscription  of  the  unmarried  men  was  to  give 
500,000  more  men  to  the  English  armies.  The  married 
men  registered  according  to  the  Derby  system,  had  no 
further  reason,  it  would  seem,  to  postpone  joining  their 
army  corps.  The  Government,  then,  had  cause  to  compli- 
ment itself  on  having  solved  the  problem  of  recruiting 
while  trespassing  as  little  as  possible  on  the  traditional 
liberty  of  English  citizens. 

However,  contrary  to  expectations,  new  difficulties 
arose.  The  registered  married  men  discovered  that 
numerous  bachelors  were  "in  ambush"  in  the  reserved 
occupations.  The  medical  examination  had  been  done 
hastily,  allowing  many  able-bodied  men  to  pass  through 
its  meshes.  Besides,  should  the  choice  be  left  to  certain 
married  men,  unscrupulous  or  cowardly  in  the  face  of  duty, 
to  go  on  with  their  business  and  "save  their  skin"  while 
the  more  scrupulous,  the  more  devoted  and  better  citizens 
were  to  risk  their  lives  for  their  benefit? 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      331 

The  idea  of  the  injustice  of  the  volunteer  system  had 
entered  most  people's  minds.  It  was  gaining  ground. 
The  tragic  reality  of  the  war  had  given  birth  to  a  desire 
for  equality,  an  idea  which  had  been  unknown  in  England 
during  centuries  of  civil  and  social  conflict.  The  conserva- 
tive press,  which,  since  the  beginning  of  the  war  strongly 
advocated  energetic  measures  and  a  vigorous  and  bold 
prosecution  of  the  war,  began  to  speak  openly  of  universal 
and  obligatory  service.  The  Times,  the  Morning  Post, 
the  Daily  Mail  advanced  certain  political  and  military 
arguments  hard  to  refute.  The  moral  reasons  in  favour 
of  conscription  were  presented  in  vigorous  terms  by  the 
Observer.  The  married  men's  cause  of  complaint  was  not 
restricted  to  the  unmarried  men  or  to  any  particular  class 
of  people,  but  was  against  the  system  itself,  a  monstrous 
system  which  allowed  the  least  worthy  to  exploit  the 
patriotism  of  the  most  worthy,  inflicted  a  punishment 
on  the  most  devoted,  granted  a  reward  to  desertion,  and 
conferred  the  advantage  of  an  exceptional  profit  of  neglect 
of  duty. 

It  is  not  a  secret  that  in  the  cabinet,  Mr.  Lloyd  George 
spoke  earnestly  in  favour  of  decisive  action  which  he 
considered  as  indispensable  and  which  after  twenty-two 
months  of  war,  he  said,  the  country  would  accept  if  pre- 
sented without  weakness.  Outside  events  played  their 
part  in  the  matter.  The  week  from  April  the  25th  to 
May  i,  1916,  was  a  dark  week  for  England.  In  quick 
succession  she  learned  of  the  Dublin  revolt,  the  bombard- 
ment of  Yarmouth  by  a  German  squadron,  a  series  of 
Zeppelin  raids  over  the  eastern  coast,  and  the  fall  of 
Kut-el-Amara  in  Mesopotamia,  despite  the  heroic  resist- 
ance of  General  Townsend.  These  ordeals,  as  usual, 
had  no  other  effect  than  to  strengthen  the  courage  of  the 
British.  Far  from  abandoning  themselves  to  vain  regrets 
or  manifesting  any  weariness,  they  screwed  up  their 


332      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

resolution  to  do  everything,  were  it  ever  so  contrary  to 
their  traditions  and  the  spirit  of  their  institutions  in  time 
of  peace,  which  would  place  them  in  the  best  position 
to  win  the  war. 

Mr.  Asquith  tried  a  last  compromise.  He  stated  the 
definite  needs  of  the  army  according  to  the  computations 
of  military  experts  and  moved  the  adoption  of  a  bill  of 
"conditional  conscription"  for  the  married  men:  if, 
within  a  month,  50,000  married  men  had  not  enlisted,  and 
if,  every  week  after  this  limit,  voluntary  enlistment  did 
not  furnish  15,000  men,  till  the  total  number  of  200,000 
were  reached,  universal  compulsory  service  would  auto- 
matically be  established. 

On  April  27,  1916,  a  memorable  sitting  took  place  in  the 
House  of  Commons.  After  energetic  and  decisive  speeches 
of  M.  Carson,  in  the  name  of  the  Conservatives,  and  of 
M.  Walsh,  in  the  name  of  the  Labour  party,  the  majority 
seemed  suddenly  to  take  in  the  gravity  of  the  situation. 
The  members,  who,  just  before  the  sitting,  were  still  bitterly 
discussing  in  the  lobby  and  cavilling  at  every  provision 
of  the  Bill,  were  carried  away,  under  the  influence  of  the 
resolute  speeches  of  the  outsiders,  by  a  powerful  wave  of 
patriotic  enthusiasm.  They  claimed  the  drastic  measure 
that  the  Government  was  still  holding  back.  .  .  .  On 
May  3rd,  the  final  determination  was  come  to :  a  Bill  for 
universal  military  service  was  passed  by  an  overwhelming 
majority. 

Thus  England,  the  pacific,  the  liberal,  the  individualistic 
nation,  entered  the  path  where  the  regime  of  armed 
peace,  imposed  by  Germany,  had  long  before  driven 
France,  who,  from  the  beginning  of  the  war,  had  drawn 
upon  her  whole  resources  of  man-power  and  borne  the 
most  exacting  sacrifices. 

Voluntary  enlistment  had  caused  the  English  Army  to 
grow  from  the  twenty-six  divisions  of  the  time  of  peace, 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      333 

to  seventy  divisions.  With  the  sailors  and  the  colonial 
contingents,  but  excluding  the  auxiliary  troops  of  India, 
it  amounted  to  5,000,000  men.  Conscription  was  now 
about  to  furnish  the  army,  in  one  month,  with  a  reserve 
of  700,000  men,  and  the  door  was  left  open  for  additional 
calls  if  military  necessity  were  to  demand  it. 

It  is  not  too  early  to  appreciate  the  value  and  fighting 
qualities  of  the  volunteer  army.  Those  whose  instruction 
was  the  most  complete,  the  "territorials, "  who  had  drilled 
every  Saturday  in  peace  time  and  had  taken  part  in  the 
general  manoeuvres,  have  been  at  the  front  since  October, 
1914.  They  have  shown  in  the  trenches,  not  only  the 
qualities  of  resistance  that  one  may  expect  from  every 
British  soldier,  but  they  draw  from  their  ardent  patriotism 
new-found  powers  of  elan — much  to  the  admiration  of 
our  troops  who  know  something  of  such  qualities.  The 
splendid  charge  of  the  London  Scottish  during  the  first 
battle  of  Flanders  will  be  remembered.  The  official 
account  of  an  "eyewitness"  relates  with  what  death- 
daring  courage  the  volunteers  charged  by  the  side  of  the 
regulars  in  the  attack  of  Neuve-Chapelle  and  Hill  60. 
The  Canadians  fought  magnificently  at  Ypres;  the  Aus- 
tralians and  the  New  Zealanders  faced  death  unflinchingly 
in  the  unfortunate  Gallipoli  campaign.  We  may  then 
have  confidence  when  the  time  comes  for  a  general  ad- 
vance, the  British  Army  with  the  French  and  Belgian 
armies  will  throw  the  Teutonic  hordes  back  with  a  vigour 
that  will  leave  little  room  for  doubt  in  Germany  as  to  the 
value  of  "sportsmen"  under  fire. 

The  English  modestly  belittle  their  part  in  the  war  in 
order  to  do  fuller  justice  to  the  immense  and  admirable 
effort  of  our  troops.  And  just  as  we  admire  the  excellent 
work  of  their  fleet,  so  they  are  insistent  in  their  admiration 
for  the  great  victory,  due  to  the  French  Army,  which 
forced  back  the  barbarian  onslaught  at  that  new  battle 


334      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

of  the  Catalaunian  Fields.  The  English  newspapers  are 
outspoken  in  their  generous  and  sincere  praise  of  our 
leaders,  our  soldiers,  and  the  French  nation.  We  are 
deeply  moved  by  it.  We  must  remember  too  that  while 
the  battle-front  held  by  the  British  Army  represents  a 
relatively  small  portion  of  the  long  line  of  defence  from 
the  North  Sea  to  the  Vosges,  it  was  the  most  imperilled 
and  most  violently  attacked  sector  in  October  and  Novem- 
ber, 1914  (not  to  speak  of  other  events  later).  Ypres, 
defended  chiefly  by  the  English,  was  witness  of  the  most 
frightful  carnage  that  had  to  be  registered  before  the 
battle  of  Verdun.  It  was  there,  too,  the  Field-Marshal's 
army  gave  proof  of  the  most  undaunted  endurance  and 
courage.  Let  us  remember,  too,  that  the  English  are  not 
only  fighting  in  Flanders  but  in  Mesopotamia,  in  Egypt, 
in  East  Africa,  and,  with  us,  in  the  Cameroon  and  in  the 
Balkans.  By  January,  1916,  their  losses  announced  by 
Mr.  Asquith  had  amounted  to  128,138  dead,  68,016 
disappeared,  353,283  wounded.  Before  the  end  of  the 
year  their  total  losses  were  considerably  over  a  million. 
Such  cruel  figures  permit  us  to  judge  of  the  importance 
of  their  effort.  For  this  powerful  assistance,  so  much  the 
more  precious  because  it  was  spontaneous  and  because  it 
surpassed  all  our  hopes  and  expectations,  we  express 
our  heartfelt  gratitude  to  the  English  nation. 

During  his  stay  in  France,  the  English  soldier  has  been 
found  to  be  as  honest,  kind,  and  obliging  in  private  life 
as  he  is  courageous,  steady,  and  chivalrous  in  danger  and 
action.  Quartered  in  our  villages,  "Tommy"  has  shown 
himself  to  be  disciplined,  respectful  of  property  and  per- 
sons, unobtrusive,  modest,  and  bon  enfant.  As  a  guest 
of  our  peasants,  he  has  taken  part  in  the  work  of  the 
farm  and  the  field;  our  good  housewives  will  not  forget 
his  readiness  to  render  service;  our  little  ones  will  re- 
member his  playfulness,  his  indulgence,  and  his  kind 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      335 

smile.  We  have  forgotten  the  slander  of  a  "perfidious 
Albion!"  The  prejudices  against  British  sans  gene  are 
disproved!  Franco-British  friendship,  sealed  in  blood 
on  the  battlefield,  has  been  cemented  not  less  surely  by  ties 
of  sympathy  and  gratitude,  by  amenities  natural  to  two 
courteous  and  refined  races,  by  considerate  behaviour 
towards  each  other,  and  by  fraternity  in  common  efforts 
and  hopes. 

The  financial  mobilization  proceeded  with  the  same 
momentum  and  with  the  same  decision  as  the  military 
mobilization.  To  meet  the  expenses  which  were  bound 
to  be  heavier  than  those  of  other  belligerents,  since  it 
was  a  question  of  creating  an  army,  England  did  not 
hesitate  to  resort  to  two  extreme  measures:  increased 
taxation  and  loans.  The  self-possession  and  self-sacrifice 
of  her  citizens  brdught  about  a  willing  acceptance  of  the 
first  increase.  The  economic  resources  and  the  patriotic 
enthusiasm  of  the  country  assured  the  full  success  of  the 
second.  The  bill  relating  to  additional  taxation  was 
boldly  introduced  before  the  first  loan.  The  Government 
had  been  encouraged  to  adopt  this  measure  by  the  citizens 
themselves  who  demanded  action  through  the  press  and 
through  public  meetings.  The  income  tax  although  high 
already  was  doubled;  in  October,  1915,  it  was  announced 
that  it  would  soon  reach  half  of  every  citizen's  income. 
For  two  loans  aggregating  nine  billions,  the  Government 
successfully  appealed  in  September  and  October,  1914,  to 
those  with  savings.  Then  in  January,  1915,  a  great  "un- 
limited loan  "  was  floated  throughout  the  United  Kingdom. 
For  days  together  great  sums  of  money  continued  to  flow 
into  the  treasury  of  the  Bank  of  England;  the  savings  of 
the  people  were  received  in  the  post-offices  in  exchange 
for  small  certificates  of  ten  or  twenty  shillings.  In  three 
weeks,  the  loan  reached  the  gigantic  total  of  fifteen 


336      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

thousand  millions.  The  Prime  Minister  in  announcing 
the  result  of  this  appeal  to  the  nation  asked  for  the  power 
to  dispose  of  a  considerable  part  of  it  "for  the  present 
or  future  Allies  of  England." 

Great  Britain's  determination  to  fight  to  the  extreme 
limit  of  her  forces  for  the  powers  of  civilization  and  peace 
against  aggression  and  barbarism  could  scarcely  be  em- 
phasized by  a  more  significant  and  generous  action. 
"The  victory,"  Lloyd  George  had  said  at  the  outset 
of  the  war,  "will  be  decided  by  the  group  of  alliances 
which  will  be  able  to  throw  into  the  struggle  the  last 
man  and  the  last  shilling."  England  had  just  taken  the 
necessary  measures  to  secure  for  herself  and  friends  the 
advantage  of  the  last  billion. 

In  a  like  spirit  the  private  generosity  of  her  people, 
for  which  England  is  well  known,  responded  to  the  needs 
of  the  hour.  Thousands  of  Belgian  refugees  were  wel- 
comed, lodged,  and  cared  for  in  the  homes  of  private 
persons.  Voluntary  contributions  were  raised  for  the 
Belgians  who  were  in  sore  need  in  their  own  country 
by  reason  of  the  German  domination,  for  the  British 
wounded,  for  the  Allied  wounded,  and  for  the  Servians 
and  the  Poles.  As  early  as  February  20,  1915,  the  Times 
subscription  had  reached  a  million  pounds  sterling.  We 
should  be  particularly  grateful  to  our  English  friends  for 
their  generosity  towards  the  French  victims  of  the  war. 
They  have  sent  us  automobile-ambulances,  transportable 
hospitals  with  their  appurtenances  and  personnel,  and  the 
Violet  Cross  service  for  the  horses.  The  Quakers  have 
come  to  France  with  a  staff  of  hygiene  experts  to  disinfect 
the  regions  transformed  into  human  slaughter-yards,  and 
of  architects  to  rebuild  ruined  villages.  English  farmers 
have  sent  our  peasants  grain  seed  and  stock  for  breeding. 
The  "French  Relief  Fund"  contributes  regularly  to  our 
Secours  National;  a  kindly  thought  of  theirs  was  the 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      337 

tactful  assistance  given  to  those  unfortunate  and  indirect 
victims  of  war  time — actors  and  artists.  The  colonies 
have  followed  the  example  of  the  Metropolis.  Australia, 
in  particular,  sends  several  hundred  thousand  francs  a 
month  for  the  food-supply  fund  of  the  Belgians. 

Finally  English  generosity  and  English  admiration  for 
the  valour  and  Constance  of  France  inspired  our  friends 
on  July  7,  1916,  with  the  idea  of  a  "French  Day,"  when 
collections  were  made  in  all  the  towns  and  villages  of  the 
United  Kingdom  for  an  immense  subscription  in  favour 
of  our  relief  societies  and  institutions  of  charity.  On  the 
same  day,  the  mayors  of  all  the  towns  signed  manifestoes 
of  friendship  and  respect  addressed  to  the  President  of  the 
French  Republic. 

This  sacrifice  of  money  and  of  oneself — this  supreme 
effort  to  bring  victory  to  the  cause  of  the  Allies — does  not 
come  from  any  one  class  or  any  one  party,  but  from  the 
whole  nation.  In  England  so  seriously  divided  by  political 
differences  on  the  eve  of  the  war  all  the  parties  have 
become  reconciled :  as  we  have  seen  in  France,  she  too  has 
brought  about  "the  sacred  union." 

During  the  first  weeks  the  socialists  hesitated.  They 
did  not  understand  that  England  had  to  adjure  her  pacific 
tenets  and  shed  her  blood  for  an  obscure  difficulty  come  to 
pass  in  the  far-away  Balkan  peninsula.  The  doings  of 
the  German  Army,  the  complicity  of  the  trans-Rhenan 
socialists  in  the  militarism  of  the  Kaiser  and  the  Junkers 
soon  had  the  effect  of  causing  them  to  see  the  war  in  its 
true  light.  The  House  members  of  the  Labour  party 
rallied  to  the  common  cause,  excepting  the  ultras  of  the 
Independent  Labour  party  under  the  leadership  of 
Ramsay  McDonald — a  handful  of  Utopists  whose  influ- 
ence was  negligible.  Among  the  women,  even  the  wild 
enthusiasts — I  mean  the  suffragettes — who  had  lately 


338      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

drawn  attention  by  their  forceful  opposition  to  the 
Government,  going  as  far  as  acts  of  violence,  destruction 
of  property,  and  arson,  rallied  to  the  cause  of  national 
defence.  Miss  Pankhurst,  the  heroine  of  the  "hunger- 
strike,"  publicly  disapproved  of  the  four  English  women 
who  yielded  to  the  manoeuvre,  financiered  by  Germany, 
of  a  Women's  Peace-Congress  at  The  Hague.  Among 
the  intellectuals,  certain  Cambridge  professors  who 
admired  German  science,  after  having  launched  a  mani- 
festo in  favour  of  peace,  solemnly  retracted  their  declara- 
tions; they  made  up  for  their  initial  attitude  by  offering 
the  hospitality  of  their  Colleges  to  the  exiles  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Louvain. 

The  news  of  the  metal  workers'  strike  in  the  Clyde  work- 
shops in  March,  1915,  and  of  the  Miners'  strike  in  Wales 
in  July  was  learned  in  France  with  a  mixture  of  surprise 
and  alarm.  Let  us  hasten  to  say  that  these  conflicts,  no 
doubt  serious  and  disturbing  because  of  their  sharpness  and 
possible  effect,  were  quickly  brought  to  a  close.  The  fact, 
however,  that  they  could  happen  shows  that  in  a  part  of 
the  population,  men's  thoughts  and  wills  were  not  yet 
concentrated  on  the  supreme  task  of  national  defence  with 
that  insistence  and  devotion  capable  of  sacrificing  per- 
sonal interests  to  the  interests  of  the  whole  people.  The 
fact  that,  in  both  cases,  the  intervention  of  a  member  of 
the  cabinet  enjoying  the  confidence  of  the  country  was 
sufficient  to  bring  about  a  mutual  understanding,  and, 
above  all,  to  induce  the  workingmen  to  respond  without 
reserve  to  the  patriotic  appeal  of  their  representative, 
proves  that  their  spirit  was  loyal,  that  their  thoughts 
were  honest,  and  that  there  was  simply  need  of  dissipating 
these  untimely  mists  of  social  disturbance  by  a  clear  word 
or  two. 

It  must  be  recognized  that  the  English  liberal  method 
which  continues  peace-time  processes  in  time  of  war  has  its 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      339 

drawbacks.  Making  an  appeal  to  the  conscience  alone, 
counting  solely  upon  the  forces  born  of  a  sense  of  duty 
and  of  will  for  good,  exposes  one  in  critical  times,  to 
inevitable  deceptions :  it  is  to  England's  honour  that  such 
a  method  is  possible  within  her  boundaries;  no  other 
nation  would  dare  rely  upon  the  rectitude  and  moral 
energy  of  her  people  to  the  point  of  considering  unwritten 
obligations  just  as  valid  as  the  imperative  stipulations  of 
the  la,w  itself.  Nevertheless  there  is  some  loss.  If,  in 
times  of  trouble,  certain  shocks  and  conflicts  of  ideas  and 
opinions  take  place,  as  they  sometimes  do,  then  the  losses 
may  spread  to  entire  classes  of  citizens.  That  is  what 
happened  in  certain  recent  circumstances  from  which 
England  has  only  just  extricated  herself.  The  mine- 
owners,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  workmen,  on  the  other, 
both  yielded  to  the  old-time  spirit  of  emphasizing  above 
all  else  the  profits  of  the  former  and  the  economic  and  social 
claims  of  the  latter,  and  both  neglected  the  new  duty  of 
abnegation  and  self-denial  and  sacrifice  of  which  the  rest 
of  the  country  was  furnishing  the  example.  Both  groups, 
finally  enlightened  as  to  their  obligations — thanks  to  the 
urgent  and  pressing  arguments  of  a  responsible  leader 
of  the  State — recovered  themselves,  and  their  dispute 
once  settled,  placed  themselves  entirely  at  the  disposal 
of  the  Government  for  the  tasks  of  national  defence. 

We  in  France — who  saw  the  unanimous  and  magnificent 
elan  of  all  the  French — ask  ourselves  as  to  the  wherefore  of 
all  this  obstinacy — were  it  only  momentary — in  holding  so 
closely  to  one's  rights  and  interests  when  a  great  wave  of 
patriotism  should  have  swept  away  all  paltry  sentiments. 
It  was  not  lack  of  patriotism.  These  very  capitalists 
had  subscribed  heavy  sums  a  few  days  before  for  national 
relief  work,  and  had  demanded,  on  their  own  initia- 
tive, an  increase  of  taxes.  These  very  workingmen  had 
offered  their  services  as  volunteers  and  had  remained  in 


340      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

the  mine  only  upon  the  insistence  of  the  authorities 
alarmed  at  the  threatened  exhaustion  of  the  country's 
manual-labour  power.  What  explains  the  attitude  of 
both  groups  is  a  series  of  causes  relating  to  the  psychology, 
to  the  traditions,  and  recent  history  of  the  English  people. 
The  English,  whose  imagination  is  slow  and  whose 
thought  is  solid  and  weighty,  are  the  least  variable  and 
adaptable  of  all  peoples.  The  acts  of  their  national 
life  never  result  from  a  sudden  illumination  which  inun- 
dates the  mind,  but  from  the  persistence  of  well -established 
movements  and  habitual  reactions.  Transformations 
with  the  English  are  slow  and  gradual:  they  are  deter- 
mined by  precedents  and  evolve  in  harmony  with  tradi- 
tion. From  that  is  derived  the  English  nation's  power 
of  progress  along  channels  traced  by  its  instinct  and 
acquired  speed.  From  that  also,  its  power  of  resistance 
when  unforeseen  circumstances  happen  to  elbow  it  out 
of  the  well-defined  channel.  The  German  menace  of  the 
last  fifteen  years  and  the  German  aggression  of  August, 
1914,  had  to  assume  their  character  of  violence  and  bru- 
tality, with  which  we  are  acquainted,  before  the  English 
reply  was  ready  to  manifest  itself  in  a  rapid  and  energetic 
manner.  Against  an  unheard-of  provocation  England 
reacted  by  an  unusual  counter-stroke  of  revolt  and 
indignation.  Let  us  not  be  surprised  that  at  the  bottom 
of  the  wave  of  indignation  the  movement  was  slower. 
Individualism,  distrust  of  government  meddling,  repug- 
nance for  the  constraints  of  mechanical  discipline  are 
characteristic  of  English  public  life  ever  since  the  fall  of 
the  Stuarts  and  the  overthrow  of  Cromwell's  dictatorship. 
In  recent  times  individualism  has  assumed  the  form  of 
organized  association  for  the  defence  of  corporate  interests. 
Nor  let  us  be  surprised  that  this  momentum  continued, 
in  part,  to  manifest  itself.  What  is  remarkable  is  the  fact 
that  its  effect  should  have  been  so  limited  and  that  the 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      341 

people  as  a  whole  should  have  so  spontaneously  and 
nobly  anticipated  the  responsibilites,  duties,  and  burdens 
necessitated  by  the  new  situation. 

The  Government  made  up  its  mind  immediately;  the 
upper-classes  adapted  themselves  to  the  circumstances 
with  decision  and  generosity;  in  the  ranks  of  the  masses, 
large  numbers  were  led  away  by  example  and  by  the  urgent 
suggestion  of  the  instinct  of  preservation.  There  re- 
mained a  fraction,  of  a  heavier  cast  of  thought  and  of  a 
lower  tone  of  emotion,  who  had  to  be  in  direct  contact 
with  the  peril  in  order  to  be  stirred.  These  latter  allowed 
themselves  to  be  carried  along  by  habit,  without  paying 
attention  to  the  "force  of  inertia"  apt  to  become  attached 
to  the  habit.  For  a  century  England  had  not  known 
any  national  danger.  As  far  back  in  her  history  as  one 
wants  to  go,  the  superiority  of  her  fleet,  the  courage  of  her 
sailors,  the  coolness  of  her  commodores  had  always  been 
sufficient  to  secure  her  immunity.  There  was  no  sign 
among  her  people  of  that  secret  anxiety  which  sounded 
a  dull  note  of  alarm  in  French  life  even  in  the  midst  of 
peace.  There  was  none  of  that  latent  emotion,  ready  to 
burst  into  an  impetuous  fever  of  anger  and  action,  which 
caused  us  to  make  up  our  minds  in  a  flash  to  accept  the 
sacrifice  of  property  and  life  and  to  direct  our  entire 
energy  towards  the  unique  goal  of  defence  and  victory. 
Indeed,  after  having  set  up  the  rampart  of  her  fleet  against 
the  attack  of  the  German  fleet,  and  having  adopted  meas- 
ures without  precedent  in  her  history,  to  increase  her  army 
to  the  level  indicated  by  the  new  European  peril,  England 
believed  she  could  resume  the  normal  course  of  her  exist- 
ence, do  business  as  usual,  recuperate  by  means  of  her 
exports  the  losses  of  her  commerce,  and  concern  herself 
with  the  social  conflicts  which  had  become  with  her  one 
of  the  aspects  of  collective  vitality.  .4s  usual  was  for  a 
time  the  motto  which  the  English  very  seriously  proposed 


342       Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

to  adopt  to  mark  their  self-possession  during  a  universal 
crisis  and  their  determination  to  hold  out  until  the  final 
solution.  This  self-possession  among  some  looked  very 
much  like  indifference  or  guilty  selfishness.  The  public 
statements  of  the  leaders,  the  objurgations  of  the  press, 
the  protests  of  public  opinion  opened  their  eyes,  aroused 
in  them  certain  generous  sentiments  lying  dormant,  and 
led  them  to  understand  that  every  citizen  whether  at 
work  in  the  factory  or  fighting  at  the  front  ought  to  face 
the  exceptional  circumstances  by  an  exceptional  sacrifice 
of  individualism  to  the  common  necessities. 

It  was  in  the  field  of  social  conflict  that  the  apparent 
neglect  of  patriotic  duty  manifested  itself  for  a  time 
because  it  is  in  that  field  that  English  individualism,  in 
late  years,  has  taken  root  with  the  most  pronounced 
determination.  England,  "mother  of  liberty,"  has  pre- 
ceded all  other  liberal  nations  in  the  creation  of  institu- 
tions guaranteeing  individual  independence,  justice,  and 
self -government;  but  she  has  not  passed  through  a  social 
revolution  like  the  Revolution  of  1793,  brought  about  by 
our  forefathers.  The  land,  and — since  the  development 
of  general  commerce  and  industry — the  wealth  of  the 
country  have  remained  the  monopolies  of  a  small  group 
of  people.  While  in  France  the  equality  of  conditions  has 
reached  such  a  degree  that  the  middle-class  forms  by  far 
the  most  numerous  element,  in  England  there  is  still  a 
gulf  between  the  upper  and  lower  classes.  This  flagrant 
inequality  was  accepted  by  the  English  people  in  the 
course  of  the  nineteenth  century  with  relative  calmness. 
The  Trades-Unions  struggled  foot  by  foot  for  higher 
wages  and  better  conditions  of  work,  but  without  re- 
volutionary intentions,  without  violence,  and  without 
chimerical  hopes. 

Socialism  with  its  theories  and  absolute  doctrines  and 
its  train 'of  aggressive  designs  and  imperious  desires  began 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      343 

to  spread  throughout  the  Labour  Unions  towards  1885  and 
has  since  made  incessant  progress  there.  The  plans  of 
total  reconstruction  and  the  vast  ambitions  and  bitter  con- 
flicts which  introduce  a  tone  of  unknown  harshness  into 
the  social  battle  were  henceforth  the  events  of  the  hour 
in  the  United  Kingdom.  Reciprocally,  the  resistance  of 
employers  became  more  energetic.  Such  was  the  state 
of  mind  rampant  in  the  Clyde  workshops  and  in  the  coal 
mines  of  Wales  at  the  end  of  the  eighth  month  in  the 
former  case  and  of  the  eleventh  month  in  the  latter  case. 
The  ability  of  the  Government,  intervening  as  arbitrator, 
consisted  in  obtaining  mutual  concessions  which  were  to 
last  as  long  as  the  war  without  engaging  the  future.  In 
a  spirit  of  prudence  the  Government  secured  a  guarantee 
against  possible  refractory  cases  in  the  form  of  an  emer- 
gency law  (which  fortunately  did  not  have  to  be  applied). 
In  a  spirit  of  patriotism  the  leaders  succeeded  in  finding 
the  right  words  to  allay  individual  fears  and  to  arouse 
feelings  of  sincere  devotion  to  the  mother-country.  The 
eloquence  and  popularity  of  Lloyd  George  accomplished 
what  remained  to  be  done.  The  machinists  enrolled  to 
the  number  of  100,000  strong  in  the  arm-  and  ammuni- 
tion-factories, created  under  State  control.  The  miners 
abandoned  the  working-hours  limit  and  their  right  to  rest 
every  other  day.  In  short  the  strike  was  averted. 

England  proved  herself  equal  to  the  necessities  of  the 
European  situation,  thanks  to  her  moral  bearing,  her 
spirit  of  sacrifice,  and  the  concentration  of  her  energies 
in  face  of  danger.  Does  she  deserve  the  same  praise 
in  the  matter  of  the  administrative  competency  of  the 
authorities  and  the  management  of  the  industrial  and 
technical  resources?  What  we  know  of  the  recruiting 
of  the  new  army  and  of  its  excellent  training  excludes 
any  idea  of  doubt  about  England's  splendid  efficiency  in 


344      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

improvising,  not  only  by  sheer  force  of  devotion,  but  also 
by  sheer  force  of  method.  There  has  been  a  good  deal 
of  discussion  recently  about  the  question  of  armament  and 
munitions.  Criticisms  have  been  made  on  this  point  by 
the  English  themselves.  The  Government  made  no 
attempt  to  dissimulate  the  insufficiency  of  its  previsions 
and  executive  measures.  But  in  reality  immense  difficul- 
ties had  to  be  overcome.  In  the  course  of  war  operations 
certain  needs  became  apparent  which  none  of  the  belli- 
gerents, Germany  included,  had  measured  to  their  full 
extent.  England  had  not  prepared  a  system  of  requisi- 
tions beforehand  because  she  was  not  organized  mili- 
tarily. At  first  she  attempted  to  distribute  government 
supply  oiders  to  private  firms,  in  the  belief  that  the 
productive  power  of  English  industry  would  suffice  for 
the  enormous  task  imposed  by  the  extensive  output  of 
war  material  and  munitions.  Certain  errors  became 
evident  in  this  system  while  at  the  same  time  it  appeared, 
according  to  the  lessons  of  the  battlefield,  that  an  un- 
limited consumption  of  munitions  was  the  sole  means 
of  economizing  human  life.  For  instance  the  number  of 
shells  used  in  the  single  combat  of  Neuve-Chapelle  sur- 
passed the  consumption  of  artillery  projectiles  during  the 
entire  Transvaal  campaign.  When  the  press  intervened 
and  demanded  the  increased  output,  the  Government 
had  already  taken  measures  to  requisition  not  only  the 
metallurgic  establishments  but  all  of  the  workshops 
transformed  into  arm-  and  shell-factories. 

The  liberty  which  it  had  been  thought  possible  to  accord 
private  initiative,  according  to  England's  traditional 
method,  had  resulted  in  disadvantages.  The  work  was 
not  only  distributed  under  poor  conditions  of  economy, 
of  total  production,  and  rapidity  of  manufacture  but  a 
certain  jealousy  and  self-interest  had  interfered  with  the 
machinery  of  management  and  a  regrettable  lack  of  zeal 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English       345 

had  characterized  the  workers.  Individualism,  such  a 
powerful  stimulant  for  intensifying  the  forces  of  action 
when  organized  and  directed,  had  produced  its  bad  effects 
through  want  of  co-ordination  and  inspiration.  Experi- 
ence had  demonstrated  that  tradition  ought  to  make  room, 
in  the  case  of  urgent  need,  for  exceptional  measures  adapted 
to  circumstances. 

The  English  Government  did  not  hesitate.  For  fear 
lest  the  new  measures  curtailing  liberty  of  action  and 
private  profit  might  appear  a  circuitous  attempt,  on  the 
part  of  the  Radicals,  to  realize  their  own  political  pro- 
gramme under  pretence  of  "public  safety,"  the  cabinet 
was  reformed.  The  most  eminent  and  competent  members 
of  the  Conservative  party  were  asked  to  collaborate  in 
the  cabinet  with  the  Radicals.  The  new  ministry — really 
national — undertook  the  industrial  mobilization  of  the 
United  Kingdom  with  a  view  to  the  intensive  production 
of  arms  and  munitions. 

A  new  department  was  created — that  of  munitions, 
which  was  entrusted  to  Lloyd  George.  An  emergency 
law  regulated  the  sale  of  alcoholic  liquors  (which  was 
chiefly  responsible  for  the  slackening  of  the  workingmen) 
and  gave  the  executive  the  power  of  inflicting  fine  and 
imprisonment  in  case  of  strikes  (which  was  declared  illegal 
unless  first  submitted  to  the  arbitration  of  the  Govern- 
ment). The  firmness  and  tact  of  Mr.  Lloyd  George 
settled  the  delicate  question  of  war  profits:  all  above  a 
legitimate  profit,  based  on  the  average  of  the  last  three 
years,  should  be  divided  equally  between  the  owner, 
the  workingmen,  and  the  State.  On  this  condition  the 
wage-earners  agreed  to  the  curtailing  of  their  acquired 
rights  and  consented  to  a  change  of  place  or  trade  accord- 
ing to  the  needs  of  production.  The  new  organization 
was,  then,  a  real  voluntary  conscription  applied  to  the 
industrial  needs  of  modern  warfare. 


346      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

Today  the  foundries  and  iron  works  of  England, 
Scotland,  and  Ireland  are  working  up  to  the  limit  of  their 
productive  capacity  under  the  control  of  the  State.  The 
State,  moreover,  has  created  sixteen  arm-  and  munition- 
factories  under  its  own  direction;  ten  others  were  to  be 
created  later,  Mr.  Lloyd  George  stated,  "for  a  special 
purpose — determined  after  an  understanding  with  the 
French  Minister,  M.  Thomas,  at  Boulogne, — from  which 
the  Allies  are  expecting  important  results."  France  and 
England  were  soon  to  be  in  a  position  to  equal  and  perhaps 
surpass  Germany  in  the  intensive  production  of  projectiles 
and  explosives. 

England,  then,  has  not  fallen  below  what  her  past  as 
a  great  industrial  nation  permitted  us  to  hope  for.  Not 
only  has  she  satisfied  the  needs  of  her  army  in  the  field, 
almost  entirely  created  a  novo,  but  she  is  manufacturing 
cloths,  harness,  machines,  military  wagons,  and  muni- 
tions for  the  Allies.  At  this  writing,  our  own  production 
of  cartridges  and  shells  has  increased  900  %,  the  English 
production  in  the  same  time  has  grown  2000  %  and  is 
going  to  reach  3000  %. 

It  appears,  then,  that  England  has  shown  herself 
efficient  in  the  very  field  which  constitutes  the  unique 
superiority  of  Germany,  namely  the  organization  of  the 
national  resources  with  a  view  to  collective  results.  Indeed 
the  necessities  of  modern  civilization,  the  progress  of 
science,  and  the  technical  arts  had  already  commenced 
to  transform  the  methods  of  production  in  England  before 
the  present  war  spurred  her  will  to  the  utmost  to  draw 
the  maximum  advantage  from  her  economic  forces.  The 
term,  "efficiency,"  used  tb express  the  new  quality  re- 
quired under  the  new  circumstances,  was  not  coined  for  the 
needs  of  the  present  moment.  For  several  years  before 
the  war,  England  had  echoed  with  appeals  for  efficiency. 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      347 

An  eminent  writer,  Mr.  H.  G.  Wells,  had  set  himself  the 
task  of  diffusing  this  doctrine. 

If  England  still  has  some  distance  to  travel  in  a  direction 
which  lengthens  in  proportion  as  science  and  its  applica- 
tions progress  and  as  the  masses,  better  instructed, 
become  more  capable  of  co-ordinated  activity,  it  is  also 
true  that  she  has  taken  an  eminent  rank  among  nations 
organized  with  a  view  to  powerful  production.  She  is 
efficient.  She  proved  it  at  the  opening  of  hostilities,  by 
undertaking  exactly  what  she  was  able  to  do  at  the  outset 
and  what  she  would  be  able  to  do  in  the  near  future. 
"Our  resources,"  said  Lloyd  George,  "will  continue 
to  grow.  We  shall  become  stronger  in  numbers,  better 
provided  with  cannon  and  munitions,  better  supplied  with 
the  necessaries  of  life,  more  and  more  powerful  financially, 
while  at  the  same  time  the  resources  of  our  enemy  will 
decrease. "  After  the  battle  of  Belgium,  the  battle  of  the 
Marne,  the  battle  of  Flanders,  the  combats  at  Beause  jour 
and  Neuve-Chapelle,  Mr.  Winston  Churchill  was  able  to 
state  with  reason  that  "the  war  had  just  begun." 

England  is  efficient  because  she  has  been  able  to  increase 
her  production  in  proportion  to  her  needs.  She  is  effi- 
cient because  she  is  patient:  her  volunteers  enrolled  for 
three  years,  her  commissariat  officers  in  France  leased 
quarters  for  ten  years.  She  is  efficient  (our  "  gen'eralis- 
sime"  is  well  aware  of  the  fact)  because  she  knows  how  to 
husband  her  men  and  graduate  the  use  of  her  resources. 
Finally  she  has  discovered — and  France  with  her — that 
efficiency  is  not  limited,  as  the  Germans  believed,  to  pre- 
cision of  material  "clock-work"  and  to  the  organization 
of  everything  according  to  the  regular  swing  of  a  machine, 
but  also  consists  in  judgment,  self-possession,  the  sense 
of  historical  realities  and  of  human  realities:  in  a  word, 
precisely  those  psychological  values  which  Herr  von 
Bulow  disdains. 


348      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

England  and  France  possess  the  constancy  and  courage 
which  the  feeling  of  a  just  cause  confers.  They  make 
efficiency  the  servant  of  moral  values.  If  I  have  succeeded 
in  the  plan  which  has  directed  this  study,  it  has  been  made 
clear  that  the  English,  considered  as  a  people,  since  the 
origin  of  their  history,  have  enjoyed  that  moral  pride 
which  makes  the  aristocratic  government,  the  administra- 
tive tyranny,  and  the  mechanical  discipline  of  the  German 
model  insupportable  in  their  eyes;  a  noble  idealism  which 
causes  them  to  place  liberty  in  the  front  rank  of  the 
benefits  of  life;  that  sense  of  fairness  which  makes  them 
desire  the  independence  and  prosperity  of  the  peoples 
worthy  of  contributing,  by  their  virtues,  to  the  progress 
of  civilization,  and  by  their  national  individuality,  to 
the  maintenance  of  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe. 
To  safe-guard  these  conquests  of  human  dignity  every- 
where on  British  soil  and  on  the  soil  of  countries  im- 
perilled by  German  barbarism,  they  rose  as  a  unit,  deaf  to 
the  tempting  bargain  by  which  it  was  thought  to  buy  their 
neutrality;  they  will  fight  on  still  until  the  goal  is  reached: 
the  dearly-won  but  glorious  goal  toward  which  reason  and 
conscience  are  pointing. 

As  individuals,  they  possess  by  tradition,  education, 
racial  gifts,  and  the  strong  structure  of  the  social  milieu, 
that  energy,  self-reliance,  and  self-control  which  they 
sum  up  in  the  very  expressive  word:  character.  With 
their  men,  whether  soldiers,  officers,  travellers,  or  leaders 
of  the  nation  and  with  their  women,  mothers  or  wives, 
nurses  or  workingwomen,  propagandists  of  military  duty 
or  organizers  of  charity,  there  will  be  no  faintness  of  heart. 
Day  by  day,  England  is  making  a  powerful  effort  and 
bearing  a  burden  of  expense  and  vast  undertaking  in 
order  to  contribute,  over  and  above  the  naval  aid  which 
was  understood,  an  unforeseen  military  aid  which  will  be 
of  capital  importance.  If  the  war  must  needs  be  long, 


Past  and  Present  Work  of  English      349 

we  may  count  upon  her,  despite  the  severity  of  the  ordeal, 
to  show  no  signs  of  lassitude. 

This  war  [said  Mr.  Asquith]  is  a  national  war.  We  shall 
persevere  to  the  end,  until  entire  reparation  has  been  made 
to  Belgium,  until  France  has  recovered  her  lost  provinces 
and  her  security,  until  Europe  has  been  delivered  of  the 
nightmare  of  armaments,  and  the  world  of  the  monstrosity 
of  Prussian  militarism. 

The  friendship  of  England  and  France  is  indissoluble, 
because  it  is  established  on  esteem,  respect,  intellectual 
and  moral  sympathy,  and  enthusiasm  for  the  same 
ideal.  This  reconciliation  of  two  great  nations  through 
forgiveness  of  injuries  and  justice  rendered  in  each  case 
to  noble,  civilizing  qualities  is  one  of  those  epoch-making 
events,  rich  in  promise,  destined  to  enlighten  the  future. 
The  Alliance  will  endure  through  the  reciprocal  modera- 
tion of  the  two  nations,  through  their  trustfulness,  their 
veneration  of  right,  and  through  their  love  of  peace. 

There  exists  today  a  splendid  symbol  of  the  Anglo- 
French  union :  it  is  the  spectacle  of  20,000  French-Canadi- 
ans, loyal  subjects  of  England  and  faithful  children  of 
France,  our  brothers  by  race  and  tongue  and  the  brothers 
of  British  citizens  by  attachment  to  English  liberty,  who 
have  come  voluntarily  to  fight  in  the  ranks  of  the  Allies 
for  the  defence  of  the  British  Empire  and  the  deliverance 
of  the  sacred  soil  of  France.  The  generosity  of  their 
double  loyalty,  their  devotion  even  unto  death  to  both 
foster-lands  announces  an  era  of  sympathy,  loyal  friend- 
ship which  in  the  long  years  to  come  will  set  firm  root  in 
French  and  English  hearts,  and  which  no  harsh  wind  of 
discord  will  ever  destroy. 

Let  this  symbol  live  in  our  memory  as  the  sign  of  an 
alliance  which  is  not  only  a  brotherhood  of  arms,  but  also 
a  communion  of  hearts!  His  Majesty  King  George  IV 


350      Past  and  Present  Work  of  English 

receiving  the  French  Parliamentary  delegation,  addressed 
them  in  these  words  of  welcome:  "  I  am  glad  to  be  united 
to  the  great  Republic  by  an  intimate  alliance  based  on 
mutual  confidence,  an  alliance  which,  I  hope,  will  last 
always."  We  accept  with  enthusiasm  the  promise  of  the 
words.  The  two  great  nations  are  journeying  henceforth 
hand  in  hand,  united  by  a  lasting  friendship  destined  to  be 
the  surest  guarantee  of  the  peace  of  the  world. 


INDEX 


Abdul-Hamid,  90 

Agadir,  114 

Aisne,  I 

Alba,  Duke  of,  27 

Annee  Terrible,  46 

Armada,  27,  f.  198 

Arnold,  Matthew,   17,  268,  276  ff., 

280  f.,  283 
Ariosto,  49 
Arthur,  King,  264 
Asquith  (W.)  Ill,  231,  328  f.,  332, 

334,  34° 
Austro-Servian  Conflict,  117  f. 


B 


Balance  of  Power,  13  ff.,  25  f.,  31, 

44>  85 

Balkan  (events)  in,  116  f. 
Bastile,  146 

Beaconsfield,  Lord,  74,  211 
Becket,  Thomas,  135 
Benedetti,  62,  116 
Bentham,  Jeremy,  158  f.,  174,  176 
Bernhardi,  184  f.,  203,  242 
Bethmann-Hollweg,  14, 39 ff.,  108  f., 

in  ff.,  119  ff.,  122 
Bill  of  Rights,  144 
Bismarck,  9,  20,  63  f.,  65,  73  f.,  77, 

79  ff.,  82,    84    f.,    88,    116,    168, 

172,  177,  182,  202,  214,  261 
Blackstone,  145 
Blanc,  Louis,  64 
Blue  Book,  107,  109,  119  £. 
Botha,  216 
Bright,  John,  75 
Brock,  Glutton,  296 
Brooks,  Sydney,  237 
Buckingham,  143 
Buffer  State,  36 
Bulow,  von,  99,  101,  108,  153 


Burke,  12,  28  ff.,  32,  146  ff.,  149  f., 

185,  222  ff.,  295 
Byron,  47,  268 


Campbell,  Bannerman  H.,  101,  108 

Canning,  47 

Carlyle,  17,  65,   162  ff.,  168,    175, 

187  f.,  193,  201   ff.,  207,  217  f., 

241,  275  f. 
Carson,  332 
Cavendish,  Lord,  231 
Chamberlain,  Joseph,  76,  84  f.,  207, 

216  f.,  233,  235 
Champagne,  I 
Charles  I.,  142  f. 
Charles  II.,  29,  143 
Charter,  Great,  236  f.,  143 
Chartism,  157 
Chartist  movement,  162 
Chaucer,  268 

Churchill,  Winston,  116,  347 
Coleridge,  175 
Communes,  135 
Conference  of  Algeciras,  99 
Conservatives,  78 
Cortez,  26 

Cowper,  William,  145 
Crimean  War,  50,  53,  54 
Cromwell,     125,     143,     165,     230, 

340 
Crown  Prince,  113 

Dante,  48 

Declaration  des  Droils,  152 

Delolme,  145 

Denain,  31 

Derby,  Lord,  325  ff. 

Descartes,  154 

Deutschtum,  16,  130 

Disraeli,  74  ff.,  78,  176,  200 

Double  Alliance,  82 


351 


352 


Index 


Drake,  27,  198 
Durham,  Lord,  227 

E 

East  India  Company,  222  f. 
Economic   condition   of   Germany, 

Off. 

Edward  VIL,  83,  91,  100 
Eliot,  John,  143 
Elizabeth,  26,  197,  264,  291 
El  Mokri,  84 
Emin  Effendi,  81 
Entente  Cordiale,  56,  80,  91  f.,  94, 

96  f.,  98  f.,  108  f.,  285,  291 
Etats  Generaux,  137 
"Eugenics,"  192 


Far  East,  3 

Fashoda,  80,  86,  208 

Faust,  167 

Fete  de  la  Federation,  43 

Fichte,  169,  173,  218 

Foch,  General,  271 

Force  of  Right,  131 

Fourth  Estate,  150 

Fox,  33,  37 

Franco-Russian  Alliance,  96 

Frederick  the  Great,  168 

Frederick  II.,  165 

Frederick-William  IV.,  178 

Freeman,  75 

French,  Marshal,  27,  315,  334 


Garibaldi,  51 

George,     Lloyd,     114,     331,     336, 

344  ff. 
George  III. 

"Germanism,"  3,  13,  53 
Gladstone,  51,  63,  74  f.,  78,  81,  86, 

212,  231,  253 

Gcethe,  127  f.,  166  ff.,  266 
Goschen,  Lord,  100,  119 
Great  War,  152,  270 
Grey,  Sir  E.,  107,  109,  112,  115  ff., 

n8ff.,  121,303 
Guises,  27 
Guizot,  56 

H 

Habeas  Corpus  Act,  30 
Hague  Conference,  97,  100 


Hampden,  143 

Hapsburgs,  73 

Harden,  185 

Hardinge,  Charles,  239 

Harrison,  Frederic,  67  f. 

Hartmann,  Julius  von,  259,  273 

Hastings,  Warren,  222  f. 

Hawkins,  Captain,  27 

Hegel,  170,  171  f.,  184,  203  f.,  274, 

281 

Heine,  Heinrich,  17 
Henry  II.,  135 
Henry  IV.,  140 
Henry  VII.,  142 
Henry  VIII.,  142 
Hobbes,  126 
Hobhouse,  190 
Haldane  (Lord),  100,  114  ff. 
Hugo,  Victor,  264 
Hume,  145 


Individualism,  12 

Inquisition,  27 

Irish  problem,  96,  106,  229  ff. 

James  II.,  114 

Jameson,  215 

Jeanne  d'Arc,  137 

Joffre,  316 


Kant,  166  ff.,  172,  266 

Kiel,  Canal,  100 

King  George,   113,   121,  239,  300, 

349 

Kipling,  205  f.,  291  f. 
Kitchener,  89,  93,  325,  327  f. 
Kluch,  von,  316 
Kossuth,  52  f. 

Kruger,  President,  81,  210  f.,  214 
Kultur,  128  ff.,  132  f.,  168,  172,  181, 

240,  242,  259,  265,  280,  297 


Labour-party,  106 

Lackland,  John,  136 

Langton,  Stephen,  135 

Lansdowne,  Lord,  108 

Liberals,  47,  58,  71,  74,  76,  176 

Locke,  126,  145 

Louis  XIV.,  22,  28  ff.,  35,  38,  323 

Louis  Philippe,  56 

Lusitania,  310 


Index 


353 


M 

Machiavelli,  141 

Made  in  Germany,  87  f.,  252 

Malplaquet,  31 

Marchand,  93 

Marlborough,  31 

Mehemet-Ali,  56,  78 

Meredith,  George,  67,  285  ff. 

Metternich,  48 

Michelet,  264 

Mill,  John  Stuart,  66,  174,  185  ff., 

193 

Milton,  49,  125,  143 
Model  Parliament,  140 
Montesquieu,  126,  140,  144  f. 
More,  Thomas,  124  f. 
Morley,  John,  239,  268 
Morocco,  98  f.,  in,  114] 


N 


Nachtigal,  81 

Napoleon,  36  f.,  38  f.,  56,  133,  148, 

200,  217,  295,  323 
Napoleon   III.,   48,  50,  54,    59  ff., 

65 

Nelson,  38,  271 
Nietzsche,  218 
Novalis,  274 


Ostwald,  130,  183 


Palmerston,  51  f.,  54,  59  ff.,  63,  71, 

74,  78,  200 
Pan-Germanism,  196 
Pankhurst,  Miss,  338 
Panther,  114 
Pascal,  277 
Paul  L,  37 

Peace  of  Aix-la-Chapelle,  29 
Peace  of  Villaf  ranca,  60 
Peel,  Robert,  58 
Peters,  Doctor,  81 
Petition  of  Rights,  143 
Philip  II.,  26,  35,  198,  323 

Pitt,  33,  35,  38 
Pius  IX.,  49 
Pizarro,  26 
Plato  124,  264,  277 
Poincare",  121,  300 
Puritans,  126,  143,  277 


Puritanism,  125 
Pym,  143 


Q 


Quinet,  Edgar,  63  f. 
R 

Radicals,  106,  146,  156 

Raleigh,  198 

Ramillies,  31 

Reform  of  1832,  157,  161 

Renaissance,  27,  48,  124,  127,  142, 
196,  198,  268 

Revolution,  American,  147,  199, 
226 

Revolution,  French,  2,  33,  46  f., 
126,  145  ff.,  149  f.,  152,  158,  162  f., 
169,  224,  264,  269,  282, 295; theo- 
ries of,  1 1  ff . 

Rhodes,  Cecil,  84,  213  f. 

Richelieu,  13,  28 

Right,  problem  of,  5  ff.,  205 

Right  of  force,  131,  256 

"Rights  of  Man,"  32,  156,  162, 
224 

Risorgimento,  42,  49 

Romanticism,  167  f.,  274 

Rousseau,  126, 145,  154,  158,  169  f. 

Ruskin,  268 

Russel,  Admiral,  30 

Russell,  Lord,  51  f.,  54 

Russo-Japanese  War,  91  f.,  238 


Salisbury,  79 

Schleiermacher,  274 

"Scrap  of  Paper,"  48,  122 

Seailles,  Gabriel,  219 

Shakespeare,  49,  52,  268 

Shaw,  Bernard,  17 

Shelley,  47,  268 

Sheridan,  37 

Sinn  Feiners,  232 

Smith,  Sir  Sidney,  38 

Stanley,  81 

"Stateism,"  German,  12,  151,  184 

Stuart,  House  of,  28  f. 

Sublime  Porte,  75 

Swinbuine,  298 


Talleyrand,  23 
Tasso,  49 


354 


Index 


Third  Estate,  138 

Thirty  Years'  War,  27 

Tirpitz,  von,  101 

Tories,  58,  71,  146,  176 

Transvaal  War,  76,  78,  81,  85  ff.,  99, 

208  ff.,  214  ff.,  235,  291,  302 
Treaty  of  Vienna,  54 
Treitschke,  168,  184  f. 
Triple  Alliance,  82  f.,  97 
Triple    Entente,    97,  99,  109,  115, 

122 
Tudors,  141  f.,  230 


U 


Union  Sacre"e,  i 


Verdun,  I 

Victoria,  Queen,  62,  78,  86,  113 

Vikings,  197  f. 


Voltaire,  145 

Von  Bernhardi,  178 

W 

War  of  Independence,  156 
War  of  the  Roses,  25 
War  of  1792,  2 
Wellesley,  38 
Wellington,  38,  271 
Wells,  H.  G.,  191  ff.,  347 
Whigs,  47,  49,  57  f.,  156 
White  Book,  109 
Wilhelm  Meister,  167 
Wilkes,  224 

William  the  Conqueror,  21,  133  f. 
William  of  Orange,  Prince,  30 
William  I.,  29 

William  II.,  9,  77,  84 f.,  88  ff.,  99  ff., 
113  f.,  178, 183,  214, 259, 261, 315, 

317,  337 
William  III.,  30 
Willoughby,  198 
Wordsworth,  38,  175,  268  ff. 


Ji:  Selection  from  the 
Catalogue  of 

G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 


Complete   Catalogues  Sent 
on  application 


The 
Peril  of  Prussianism 


By 
Douglas  Wilson  Johnson 

Associate  Professor  of  Physiography,  Columbia  University 
12°.     7  Maps.     75  cts.  net.     By  mail,  85  cts. 

Americans  will  not  support  with  enthusiasm  a  cause 
they  do  not  understand,  nor  shed  their  blood  with 
unmeasured  generosity  to  achieve  ends  they  cannot  see. 
The  purpose  of  the  author  is  to  help  his  fellow  citizens  to 
measure  the  magnitude  of  the  great  cause. 

"  Professor  Johnson  devotes  his  volume  to  a  demon- 
stration-of  the  growth  of  Prussianism,  its  character  and 
its  purpose.  Beginning  with  an  insignificant  territory  in 
Eastern  Germany,  that  baleful  thing  now  dominates  all 
central  Europe  and  much  of  Asia.  The  little  black  spot 
upon  the  map  of  a  few  centuries  ago  has  grown  into  a  huge, 
sprawling  blot  reaching  from  the  North  Sea  and  the  Baltic 
to  the  Mediterranean,  the  Red  Sea,  and  the  Persian  Gulf. 
The  character  of  Prussianism  has  meantime  become  more 
and  more  Hunnish,  and  its  purpose  has  developed  from 
local  self-defense  to  universal  conquest.  The  maps  which 
accompany  the  text  illustrate  admirably  the  geographical 
features  of  the  story,  and  complete  a  singularly  informing 
and  suggestive  little  book. " — N.  Y.  Tribune, 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New  York  London 


The   Government   of 
England 

National,  Local,  Imperial 

By 
D.  D.  Wallace,  Ph.D. 

Author  of  "  The  Life  of  Henry  Laurens, "  etc. 
8°.     Price,  $2.00  net.     By  mail,  $2.10 

The  English  Government  as  it  is,  without 
a  distracting  account  of  how  it  came  to  be 
what  it  is.  The  common  habit  of  first  describ- 
ing the  government  as  it  is  supposed  to  be  in 
theory  and  then  explaining  that  it  is  not  really 
this,  is  avoided.  The  author  has  also  kept  in 
mind  the  resemblances  and  contrasts  between 
the  government  of  England  and  that  of  our 
own  country. 

G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New  York  London 


"The  War  and 

Humanity  " 

By 

James  M.  Beck 

A  Notable  Sequel  to  "  The  Evidence  in  the 
Case" 

"  Mr.  Beck's  volume  was  a  classic  the  moment  it  ap- 
peared. We  know  of  no  more  logical  and  lucid  discussion 
of  the  essential  facts  and  problems  of  the  great  war,  nor 
any  more  truly,  consistently,  and  even  vigorously  Amer- 
ican in  its  spirit.  We  should  be  well  content  to  let  it 
stand,  if  there  were  no  other,  as  the  authentic  expres- 
sion of  the  highest  aspirations,  the  broadest  and  most 
penetrating  vision,  and  the  most  profound  convictions  of 
the  American  nation  on  matters  which  have  never  been 
surpassed  and  have  only  twice  been  rivalled  in  vital  in- 
terests in  all  our  history." — New  York  Tribune. 

THEODORE  ROOSEVELT'S  OPINION 

"It  is  the  kind  of  a  book,  which  every  self-respecting 
American,  who  loves  his  country,  should  read." 

Revised  and  Enlarged  Edition 
Nearly  400  pages.     $1J>0  net     By  mail,  $1.60 

At  All  Booksellers 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New  York  London 


The  Evidence  in 
the  Case 

A  Discussion  of  the  Moral  Responsibility  for  the  War  of 

1914,  as  Disclosed  by  the  Diplomatic  Records 

of  England,  Germany,  Russia,  France 

Austria,  and  Belgium 

By 
JAMES  M.  BECK,  LL.D. 

Late  Assistant  Attorney-General  of  the  U.  S. 
With  an  Introduction  by 

The  Hon.  JOSEPH  H.  CHOATE 

Late  U.  S.  Ambassador  to  Great  Britain 

14th  Printing — Revised  Edition  with  much  Additional 

Material 
12°.     Over  280  pages.    $1.25  net    By  mail  $135 

"  Mr.  Beck's  book  is  so  extremely  interesting 
from  beginning  to  end  that  it  is  difficult  when 
once  begun  to  lay  it  down  and  break  off  the 
reading,  and  we  are  not  surprised  to  hear  not 
only  that  it  has  had  an  immense  sale  in  England 
and  America,  but  that  its  translation  into  the 
languages  of  the  other  nations  of  Europe  has 
been  demanded." — Hon.  Joseph  H.  Choate  in 
The  New  York  Times. 

New  York        G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons  London 


